Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Houston, TX [Ms. Jackson-Lee].

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California, [Mr. Berman], a member of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Richardson]. (Mr. RICHARDSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. That being the case, Mr. Speaker, then, I am pleased to yield my remaining time to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Engel], a former member of the Committee on International Relations and the newest member of the Committee on Commerce, and we hope that he will return to the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. The gentleman from New York has the right to close; is that correct?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, would the Chair be good enough to give me the remaining time on both sides?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Let me ask my colleague, for whom I have great respect, and I certainly have great respect for former Secretary Baker that he mentioned, did he say how this reorganization should take place? And specifically which agency should be eliminated? And could the gentleman tell me how all of that, put in context, is going to help improve foreign policy?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran], a member of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my extreme disappointment with the majority leadership of this Congress for revisiting the assault weapons ban which passed the House in 1994. I think it fair to say that we are considering legislation to repeal the law today because the majority leaders ``owe'' the gun lobby. This is just one more example of how our agenda is being driven by interest groups with big pacs. I am also shocked that the leadership has so thoroughly circumvented the committee process on this legislation. We should have had hearings. Before we consider repealing the law we should first know if it has been successful. What do our police officers think? Do they want to see the ban repealed? Has it helped save lives? Has it been effective? It is absolutely absured and outrageous that there has been no consideration or debate of this issue. Mr. Speaker, I believe in self-defense. However, I do not believe one needs an AK-47 to defend himself. AK-47s can shoot 106 rounds in 2 minutes. They are high speed machine guns that have been used for shooting sprees. Patrick Purdy, using an AK-47, killed 5 small children and their teacher, while wounding 29 others on a playground in stockton, CA. What about the defense of these children? Whose concern is that? Those of use and who support the assault weapons ban are trying to make the would a little safer for our children. Furthermore, every major national law enforcement organization in the country supports a ban on semi-automatic assault weapons. These are the cops on the beat in Miami and Ft. Lauderdale. They see no purpose for assault weapons, and I trust their judgment. I support the men and women who are fighting crime on our streets. Mr. Speaker, with this vote we have to ask ourselves if we want a society that permits the sale of machine guns or we want a society that controls gratuitous weapons? A majority of Americans agree with me, Mr. Speaker. They believe in reducing bloodshed and saving lives. They support the ban on assault weapons and so should this Congress.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I join my colleagues in allowing that, among other things, if we had a fair formula in Florida and if we received the taxpayers' fair share, we would not need this exceptional refugee funding. One size does not fit all in this country. We have a unique problem in Florida that demands a unique solution. This influx causes a severe impact on our social, economic, and health services.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 7, 1996, during consideration of H.R. 3019, the Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, I mistakenly voted ``nay'' on the Lowey amendment. This amendment would have deleted the bill's provision permitting States to decide whether to use Medicaid funds to pay for an abortion in the case of rape or incest. Had the amendment passed, it would have retained the current law which requires that States fund abortions in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the woman. My vote against the Lowey amendment was purely accidental. I have always been and will continue to be 100 percent supportive of a woman's right to choose.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding me this time. Also I would like to thank the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary for offering initially to extend to me a small amount of time. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple. It makes it easier for our Government to prosecute those persons who provide material support knowing that the support will be used in acts commonly associated with terrorism. It is designed to buttress existing Federal law and to make those who knowingly support these crimes accountable. The crimes are enumerated, and in the interests of everyone's time, particularly the chairperson and the ranking member and any other Member who may wish to speak, I merely wish to add in spite of the matters that have gone before us, and I do agree with the ranking member that this matter now has been eviscerated, we must somehow or another get at the roots of terrorism by giving our law enforcement authorities the ability to prosecute those persons who, while they may not actually carry out the activities themselves, enable the terrorists to operate here in the United States as well as elsewhere. My amendment had hoped to be able to address that specific subject by expanding the enumerated crimes. I ask support for this version and the en bloc amendments. Mr. Chairman, it is time to get tough on terrorism. The amendment I am offering today will do just that. I am proposing a very simple, yet very important modification to title I of H.R. 2703. Title I provides criminal jurisdiction to the United States to investigate and prosecute certain terrorist offenses carried out by or against American citizens as well as terrorist offenses that are planned within the United States but carried out overseas. Section 103 of title I states that persons who provide material support ``knowing or intending'' that it be used for certain criminal acts will be subject to a fine or imprisonment. The section does not specify that a terrorist must be the one to knowingly provide material support; it states that anyone who knowingly provides material support for terrorist activity shall be punished. My amendment adds specific criminal violations to the list of crimes currently found in this section. This modification does not tread on civil liberties; it simply expands the list of crimes in the material support provision to cover other acts commonly associated with terrorism. These acts, from title 18, section 2339A, United States Code, include: Arson with special maritime-territorial jurisdiction; development, production, or transfer of biological-nuclear weapons; transferal or possession of plastic explosives which do not contain a detection agent; destruction of communication lines, energy facilities, national defense materials; production of defective national defense materials; and conduct relating to torture. This amendment is timely and necessary. Here is why: One of the crimes my amendment will be adding relates to nuclear weapons, as in ``Whoever knowingly provides material support, for the delivery, possession, use, transferal, receives, possess, alteration of, disposes of, or disperses, disposes of, any nuclear material and knowingly causes the death of or serious bodily injury to any person or substantial damage to property; or knows that circumstances exist which are likely to cause the death of or serious bodily injury to any person or substantial damage to property'' shall be punishable by fine or imprisonment. Therefore, if I, Alcee Hastings, give money to Hamas, knowing that the funds would be used to transport nuclear material to Tel Aviv, where it would be used against civilians, I would now be punishable under section 103 by imprisonment or a fine. Without this addition, the person who knowingly provided material support for the crime would go unpunished. By expanding the current list of crimes to include other acts associated with terrorism, we are making the bill more comprehensive. And in the shadow of recent terrorist bombings in Israel and England, as well as an increase of terrorist attacks within the United States, it is vital that we provide law enforcement with sufficient tools to fight these atrocities. Support the Hastings amendment.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Reclaiming my time, that is not what he said. I want it clearly understood there has not been an authorization bill for foreign aid since 1985, but that does not relate to this bill since the foreign aid authorization has been deleted from this measure. I just wanted to point that out. I think that that will reflect accurately, and the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] needs to be mindful of that. This report has a myriad of problems, as illustrated by the fact that not one Democrat on the conference committee supported the final product. The President, as the chairman a moment ago has pointed out, has promised to veto it and correctly so. It reorganizes and eliminates foreign policy agencies because of political concerns, not because the changes will make operations more efficient. The report also cuts spending on our foreign aid programs too deeply. The minimal amounts that we spend in the first place reap benefits for us in expanded trade, better relations, a greater sphere of influence, just to mention a few things. But to cut back on our meager assistance is just plain shortsighted. This conference report is just another example of this Congress micromanaging foreign policy and preventing the President from doing his job. Foreign policy obviously is important. We cannot wish the world's problems away. Instead of retreating, we must have the flexibility to get involved so that we can help those in trouble and promote our own interests. The two goals are not incompatible, but they will be unachievable if this report is passed. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out one more thing, and that is the provision dealing with Taiwan. This simply is not the right time to bring this kind of provocative measure to the floor. The fact of the matter is, Taiwan is getting ready to have an election and China is rumbling all over the place. For us to deal with this kind of measure stops us from being able to take the kinds of measures that are vitally necessary.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, the repudiation at this time would destabilize what we have done, I would remind my friend. We have a longstanding policy that this United States has, both Republican and Democrat, toward China. What we will be doing is increasing the risk at the time of heightened tensions. I am not opposed to us talking about this, but I am talking about the timing.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my opposition to the conference report on H.R. 1561. Before I point out what I believe to be mistaken undertakings on behalf of our committee, I would like to point out that my friend, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss], who happens not to be on the floor at this time, made a statement earlier regarding this bill which is not correct. He stated that this would be the first State Department authorization bill since 1985. Our research shows that that simply is not accurate. There has been a State Department authorization bill every year for the last 15 years authorized in 2-year increments.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman, and I would like to refer some of my remarks to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], chairman, and to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], ranking member, both of whom I have immense respect for, and I genuinely mean that. The fact of the matter is that the Florida Everglades are the second largest national park in the United States of America, and while I agree that everybody ought get in line, this is a pay me now or pay me later situation. What is going to happen, if we do not do this soon, and I mean sooner than later, is we are going to find ourselves in the position of having to pay a great deal more. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my support for the Foley amendment. Mr. Speaker, the Florida Everglades is the largest subtropical wetland in the United States and this country's second largest national park. Spanning south Florida from the coral reefs off the Keys to the headwaters of the Kissimmee River near Orlando, the size of the Everglades is only surpassed by the number of diverse ecosystems and habitats it supports. Nurturing the existence of humans and literally hundreds of wildlife species, the Everglades houses the most complex ecosystem in the United States. It is in urgent need of restoration and this amendment is another step in the long process of restoring the Glades to its proper majesty. Mr. Chairman, this amendment enjoys bipartisan and bicameral support. Vote for the Foley amendment and help keep the Everglades part of America the Beautiful.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I am pleased to have this opportunity to support the Roth-Bereuter- Hamilton-Hall amendment. Different than the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall], I have not seen as many areas of the world where programs have been in effect that have helped people to maintain their existence. However, in the Sudan, in refugee camps in Nigeria, in Somalia, and in Ethiopia, I have seen the work of CARE, the Catholic Relief Services, AfriCare, and Save the Children. U.S. food aid and export programs do serve the U.S. national interest. U.S. food programs have saved tens of millions of people from starvation and improved the health and living standards of many more. These programs have reinforced the political stability in dozens of friendly countries and created large markets for U.S. exports. I find it rather appalling that many of my colleagues do not want to help farmers, yet in their rhetorical flourishes in their districts they talk all the time about wanting to help farmers. Let me tell you a few countries that used to be on food aid: Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, and Turkey. And all of these now are not only big emerging markets but some are competitive with this great country. They are all huge customers of U.S. farm products, and they were once food aid recipients. Food aid has also supported tens of thousands of jobs in the United States and continues to do that. I urge the membership of this body to consider this legislation and to recognize that while it is stalled and while we await authority, Food for Peace and Food for Progress has expired. Needed changes in these programs have not been made.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my outrage over Fidel Castro's act of violence by shooting down two small unarmed civilian planes last Saturday. Shooting down unarmed civilian planes is a flagrant violation of international law and a horribly inhumane act. There are legitimate ways for a country to protect their national borders, but the Cuban Government ignored every one of them last Saturday by shooting down these planes. International law dictates that civilian planes should not be fired upon even if they do fly into forbidden airspace. It requires warning off the approaching aircraft. But the Castro government decided to react in the most brutal way by ignoring American urgings to stay on a peaceful and legal path. Mr. Speaker, Since Castro's rise to power, Cuba has surpassed every other Nation in the Western Hemisphere in human rights violations. Because we cannot rest in the face of the oppression of the Cuban people, I fully support the steps taken by the Clinton administration as well as the Helms-Burton legislation which imposes tighter sanctions on Cuba. Mr. Speaker, we cannot allow these acts of violence to be perpetuated against any person, Cuban or American. Fidel Castro has no respect for the dignity of human life. Maybe the passage of Helms-Burton as well as additional steps taken by the administration will teach him, if not the value of human life, then the repercussions he faces when he kills unarmed American civilians.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my opposition to the Miller-Schumer amendment. Let me immediately say that I take a back seat to absolutely no one in this House in the protection of the environment in this Nation, and especially in Florida. Neither does the sweetener industry in my district. They have already agreed to spend nearly one-half billion dollars to clean up the environment in the locale in which they do business. One other thing I want to say to my colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina, Mark Sanford. If there is some law against making $65 million, then many a corporate executive ought to be put in jail, because a whole lot of them make a whole lot of money, and therefore, I do not see any prohibition. Large farmers mean large numbers of jobs, where I live. Forty thousand jobs in Florida are connected to this industry. If those jobs were to be lost in this era of downsizing, right-sizing, reengineering, temporarying, and outsourcing, somebody come tell me where they are going to work, because I do not know where they are going to work. That is a genuine concern that we all ought to have in this Nation. Mr. Chairman, I ask defeat of this measure, and support of jobs in the State of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my opposition to the Miller- Schumer-Kingston amendment. The current sugar program has worked since its inception to ensure a steady supply of sugar at a stable price. The program does not cost the taxpayers anything. In fact, the USDA has estimated that with the interest on support loans and fees and duties on imported sugar, the program has actually increased Federal revenues. But aside from my belief that the current sugar program helps the American consumer, I oppose this amendment because there are 40,000 people in and around my district who depend on the sugar industry for their jobs. I will not watch these 40,000 jobs disappear from Florida without a fight. The current program has worked well--it provides a stable, inexpensive supply of sugar while utilizing our agricultural labor force. I do not want to see these jobs go overseas. Oppose the Miller-Schumer amendment.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate so very much the gentleman yielding and I appreciate my colleague from Florida and his leadership, as well as the leadership of the gentlewoman from Florida [Ms. Ros-Lehtinen], and the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Meek], in this regard. I have just arrived and have not had an opportunity to come to the floor, but I want to make it very clear that I support the action as offered by Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and denounce totally the shooting down of unarmed airplanes in either Cuban waters or international waters. I have heard this argument made about the planes, where they were shot down. I would hate like the dickens to feel that an unarmed airplane coming into the United States with no obvious military mission would be shot down. We have forced planes down from Cuba into Florida air space without having to shoot them down and certainly had the ability to shoot them down. On that score, there is no question but that the act itself was extremely ruthless, and appropriate action and response should be undertaken. I would immediately say that the actions taken by the State Department and by the President of the United States were appropriate for that time, but they certainly need to stay in consultation with those of us and especially Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who have a clear understanding of the dynamics that are involved in trying to eradicate this dictator.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I would certainly not condone the overreaction of the store owner in your analog. But putting this in its proper context, there are international laws that countries that are decent observe. This was an indecent act, and that is putting it mildly. I really appreciate an opportunity to intervene in this special order, but I just wanted to have it clearly understood I will have more to say in the appropriate stages, but I did want it understood, certainly by my colleagues, where I am coming from.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to join the American Jewish Committee in honoring Willie Gary of Stuart, FL. Willie Gary is an outstanding American whose story must be told. His parents were sharecroppers and migrant farm workers who raised 11 children. When Willie was 13 his father Turner settled his family in Indiantown, FL, where he started a produce business from the back of a truck he had bought with the help of his son, Willie, who had earned the money mowing lawns. Willie, a high school football star who was determined to go to college, secured an athletic scholarship to Shaw University in Raleigh, NC. While at Shaw he married Gloria Royal. By the time he graduated in 1971 Willie had one son and an successful lawn care business. But Willie wanted more. In 1974 he graduated from North Carolina Central University with a law degree and a second son. After his graduation from law school the Gary family returned to Florida. Willie was admitted to the Florida bar and their third and fourth sons were born. In 1975 Willie opened the first black law firm in Martin County. In 1976 he opened a second office in Ft. Pierce. Today, the law firm of Gary, Williams, Parenti, Finney, Lewis & McManus is a large, sophisticated law firm with a national reputation. Willie Gary and his wife Gloria have given new meaning to the word philanthropy. God blessed Willie Gary with a magnificent legal talent which Willie has used to amass a measure of wealth. But what is really important about Willie Gary is that he has been abundantly generous with both his time and his money to his family, church, community, educational institutions, his alma mater, civic organizations, professional groups, friends, and individuals too numerous to mention. Willie Gary deserves the American Jewish Committee's Learned Hand Award because he is a mensch. He is a brilliant man who has dedicated his life to his family and ensuring that all members of his community have outstanding legal representation. Judge Edward Rodgers and I were given the privilege of being honorary cochairs of the event honoring Willie. We are both so very pleased to be associated with the American Jewish Committee in honoring this great American.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the seven crew members of the space shuttle Challenger. Ten years ago on January 28, 1986, these brave astronauts fell victim to one of our Nation's most horrific tragedies--the Challenger explosion. Indeed, human space exploration is and has always been inherently risky but this should not deter us from reaching for the stars or from exploring this new frontier. Forty nine space shuttle missions have been succssfully completed since 1986. The safety features of the space shuttle have improved substantially since the Challenger tragedy. It is possible, NASA officials believe, that if a similar accident happened today, crew members could escape with their own oxygen supply and parachutes. A healthy shuttle program is fundamental to construction of the international space station--starting in late 1997, which will be the basis of further human exploration of Mars and beyond. NASA plans to launch 26 shuttle flights between 1997 and 2002 to help assemble this station. Additionally, a preliminary plan designed by NASA and the Russian Space Agency envisions using the space shuttle to deliver Russian hardware to resupply the orbiting Mir station. Therefore, the space shuttle program will be instrumental in the enhancement of international cooperation, the forerunner of world space. Furthermore, the reusable space shuttle is the way of the future for launching commercial and military satellites. As one of the parents of the astronauts remarked, he was ``pleased that the crew's footsteps were being followed'' and ``that their hopes and dreams are marching forward.'' On the 10th anniversary of this disaster, we must express support for the continuation of the space exploration mission in order to truly honor those seven brave explorers.