Henry Hyde

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, a couple of comments on remarks made earlier by the gentleman from Massachusetts. The unions do not speak with one voice on this issue. We have received correspondence from the AFL-CIO locals that represent the correctional officers in the prisons who are very much against this bill. The prisoners do not have any lobbyists on Capitol Hill, and perhaps for purposes of this debate I can appoint myself as their lobbyist because I do have a perspective on the prison and prisoners and what their future and what their present could be. One of the most memorable events in my life was attending a graduation ceremony of prisoners in the Cook County jail where these young men marched to the tune of ``The Impossible Dream'' in their secondhand graduation robes where they were getting an eighth grade diploma. Some of them had been taught how to read, something that their education had missed. The room was filled with employers who were going to see that these people, who tried to put their time in jail to use, were going to have some hope instead of despair when they left the prison. Yes, this is a Federal subsidy of prison industries, but we rush to subsidize the farmer, or we rush to subsidize research at universities and education. Subsidies are not alien to this body. But the social good that comes from prison industries, it seems to me, outweighs any distaste for a Federal subsidy. One of the great unmet needs of our country is prison reform. Currently there are 145,000 federally incarcerated prisoners. I ask whether or not we have a duty towards them. I think one of the purposes of imprisonment is rehabilitation and one very effective way to rehabilitate, especially someone who has never had an education, as many of these have not, is to provide work opportunities and training. This is a government program that works and that does not cost a dime. Since 1934, thousands of prisoners have changed their lives, have been better when they left the prison than when they came in. What is the result of a functional Federal prisoners program? Restitution to the victims, support their families, pay some of the costs of incarceration, and some gate money for when they leave. These are all highly useful social consequences and ought to be considered. Work is constructive. Idleness is destructive. These programs provide incentives for good behavior. To work in the Federal Prison Industries, you need a general education diploma or be working towards it. That is important. The other is a record of good behavior. Close them down, curtail them, limit them and you only ask for trouble in prison. Small business is supported by FPI because over $502 million worth of raw materials and other goods were purchased by FPI from private business. Sixty-two percent was from small business. Less work and more idleness combined with inmate overcrowding and staff shortages is a formula for disaster. We should be building, not tearing down. I think we encourage hope, we encourage opportunity, not despair, by strengthening and reinforcing Federal Prison Industries, not weakening them, as this bill unintentionally will do. I hope this bill is not supported and we go ahead and get the report that the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green) has asked for so we are not legislating in the dark.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call attention to the remarks given by Cardinal Avery Dulles during his homily for the 50th Annual Red Mass at St. Matthews Cathedral in Washington, D.C. The Red Mass-- named for the red vestments worn by the celebrants and the color of fire, symbolizing the Holy Spirit--is celebrated annually in Washington the Sunday before the new U.S. Supreme Court session begins. This liturgy invokes guidance and wisdom on judges, attorneys, government officials and Supreme Court justices in their administration of justice. The Red Mass is sponsored by the John Carroll Society, a Washington area organization of lay professionals. This year marks the 50th Anniversary of the Red Mass. Cardinal Dulles is an internationally-recognized theologian and is one of the leading thinkers of the American Catholic Church. He was born in New York in 1918 to John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State under President Dwight Eisenhower, and Janet Pomeroy Avery Dulles, and was ordained a Jesuit priest in 1956. Cardinal Dulles has written over 700 articles and 22 books on Catholic theology and has served on the faculty of Woodstock College and the Catholic University of America. Currently, he is the Laurence J. McGinley Professor of Religion and Society at Fordham University. He was elevated to the College of Cardinals in February 2001. During his homily, Cardinal Dulles spoke on the subject of law and spirit. He said that law and spirit are ``inextricably conjoined'' and that laws are unsustainable without a moral and spiritual foundation. He also talked about our overly litigious society and the dangers of an obsessive legalism in the absence of virtue and grace. To sustain law and to enhance the relationship between spirit and law, Cardinal Dulles emphasized families, schools and churches as the primary agents for transmitting moral values and principles. He stated that ``the family, as the nucleus where life is born and where coming generations are formed, is today under severe pressure'', and that it needs to be protected. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the remarks of Cardinal Dulles for the Record: Law and Spirit 50th Annual Red Mass, Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J., Cathedral of St. Matthew, Washington, DC, October 5, 2003 (Readings: Jer 31:31-34; 2 Cor 3:1-6; Jn 14:15-17) All three of the readings for this Mass deal with the same two themes: law and spirit. Ezekiel prophesies a time when the law will be inscribed by the Spirit on the hearts of the people. Paul says that the Christians of Corinth have in their hearts a law written by the Spirit of the living God. And in the Gospel reading from John, Jesus speaks of the indwelling Spirit who will prompt his disciples to keep his commandments. Many of you who are present for this Mass are in one way or another connected with the law, whether as legislators, as advocates, as administrators, or as judges. You therefore have to face the question, how is the law related to things of the spirit? In biblical history the two are neither separable nor antithetical but are inextricably conjoined. The Spirit of God inspires those who make the laws and gives the people the capacity to observe those same laws. Is the same true, at least analogously, for civil society? Do the making of laws, their interpretation, and their observance require spiritual qualifications? The French political philosopher Montesquieu, in a work that profoundly influenced the framers of the United States Constitution, held that each major form of polity is animated by a distinct spirit, which he called, in the title of his classic work, ``The Spirit of the Laws.'' In a monarchy, he said, the dominant spirit is honor; in a despotism, it is fear, and in a republic the spirit must be virtue. The founding fathers of our nation agreed. Our first three presidents, Washington, Jefferson, and John Adams, spoke eloquently of the necessity for civic virtue to undergird the health of our republic. Our fourth president, James Madison, wrote to the same effect: ``To suppose any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people is a chimerical idea.'' Civic virtue, of course, is not a substitute for law. In a complex society such as ours, many laws are needed to coordinate social relationships. We justly pride ourselves in having a government of laws that prevents tyranny and capriciousness. But it is possible, in the absence of virtue, to put too much stock on law. Alexis de Tocqueville, a keen observer of the American scene, said that the Europeans of his day gave too much emphasis to laws and too little to mores. In the United States, he contended, customs and religious beliefs pervaded social life so thoroughly that the laws could be less onerous. Where virtue prevails, laws will be framed with a view to the common good, not private self-interest. The laws, perceived as agreeing with the norms of justice, will carry moral authority. A virtuous people will feel obliged in conscience to obey them. But if laws are framed to satisfy the interests of particular groups, they will lose their moral authority, and the citizens will feel entitled to disobey, provided they do not get caught. Vice and criminality will proliferate. Civilization depends on habits of the heart. It requires citizens who can trust one another to be honest, considerate, and truthful. When trust evaporates, the law has to assume a coercive function, compelling people to obey against their will. Elaborate mechanisms of surveillance, prosecution, and punishment must be erected. An army of auditors, detectives, police, attorneys, trial judges, and prison guards strives in vain to secure the order that responsible freedom would achieve. Free society gradually transforms itself into a police state. In our litigious society, thirst for gain almost eclipses the passion for justice. Friends and family members readily take each other to court. Malpractice suits and the cost of insurance are forcing doctors and other professionals to abandon their practice. The courts are congested with heavy backlogs. We build more and larger prisons, which prove only to be schools of crime. As men and women of the law, you know well that virtue cannot be legislated. But your concern for the law itself must give you a sense of the importance of moral convictions and moral training for the health of our society. In our American tradition, great reliance has been placed on private institutions that directly inculcate virtue. Families, schools, and churches are among the primary agents for transmitting sound moral values. The family, as the nucleus where life is born and where coming generations are formed, is today under severe pressure. It needs to be protected so that children can be raised in a stable and healthy environment. Broken homes and dysfunctional families are breeding-grounds of crime. Schools extend the pedagogical functions of the family. To the degree that public education fails to instill moral convictions and behavior, this task will fall more heavily on private institutions, especially those conducted under religious auspices. Schools of this character fill the void left by value-free institutions that limit themselves to factual information and technical skills. Religious institutions are of inestimable importance for transmitting moral probity. Perceiving this, John Adams declared: ``Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.'' George Washington said much the same: ``Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail to the exclusion of religious principle.'' The government cannot establish in this country any given religion, but it can protect and support religion as an aid to civic virtue. Law and spirit belong together. They are as inseparable as body and soul. Law, at least civil law, is a human achievement, but the spirit, if it is to be upright, depends chiefly upon the grace of God, who can transform our hearts and fill them with his love. May God forgive us for having so often tried to do without him! In prayer and worship we beseech him to impart a generous measure of his Spirit on our nation, its governors, and those who frame, interpret, and apply its laws.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the recent passing of the former First Lady of China and Taiwan, Madame Chiang Kai-shek, also known to history as Soong Mei-ling. Madame Chiang was a steadfast ally of the United States and an old friend of the Congress. Madame Chiang came from an illustrious family whose members played prominent roles in the history of 20th century China. One of her sisters married Dr. Sun Yat-sen, the father of modern China, while Madame Chiang herself wed a rising young military officer named Chiang Kai-shek. She was one of the last living links to our alliance with China during World War II, in which she played a central role as adviser to her husband, President Chiang Kai-shek. Her death at age 106 represents the passing of an era. Madame Chiang's ties to the United States were strong and long- standing. She was educated at Wesleyan College in Macon, Georgia and at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, where she graduated with honors in 1917, attending college at a time when most American women, not to mention Chinese women, had little opportunity to pursue higher education. Her bicultural and bilingual skills allowed Madame Chiang to serve as a cultural bridge between East and West. She entered the American consciousness in the dark days of 1943 when the Chinese government, fighting for its life against the Japanese invaders, sent her on a goodwill mission to the United States. Madame Chiang crisscrossed the nation, and in eloquent speeches delivered in flawless English, she won the hearts of millions of Americans and graced the cover of Time Magazine. Her efforts culminated here on Capitol Hill where she became the first Asian woman to address a joint session of the Congress. Her appearance was instrumental in securing billions of dollars in military aid by the United States to China, thereby enabling a free Chinese government to survive and continue to fight. Madame Chiang returned to Capitol Hill a half century later when, in 1995, she was invited to assist with commemorative events marking the fiftieth anniversary of the end of World War II. Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that, in addition to her death being mourned here and in Taiwan, even Madame Chiang's former opponents in Beijing offered kind words for her upon her passing. The Chairman of the Chinese People's Political Consultive Conference offered ``deep condolences'' to the family of Madame Chiang. The Chairman paid tribute to her by noting that she had ``been dedicated to the Chinese people's war of resistance'' during World War II. The People's Daily noted that ``she walked with China through turbulent times.'' Today, we remember Madame Chiang fondly as an old friend who devoted herself to understanding, friendship, and cooperation between the peoples of the United States and China. She leaves a lasting legacy, and we are greatly indebted to her for her life's work.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I submit for printing in the Congressional Record the following correspondence concerning H.J. Res. 63: (1) an exchange of letters between Chairman Thomas and myself; (2) a letter from Chairman Regula to me; (3) a letter from Chairman Pombo to Chairman Nussle; and (4) a letter from me to Chairman Nussle. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC, September 24, 2003. Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman, Committee on International Relations, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Hyde: I am writing concerning H.J. Res. 63, the ``Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003,'' which was referred to the Committees on International Relations, Resources and Judiciary. I understand that a short-term extension of the compacts may be included in a Continuing Resolution to be considered by the House. As you know, the Committee on Ways and Means has jurisdiction over matters concerning trade. H.J. Res. 63, which incorporates Article IV of the agreements with the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, contains several provisions involving tariffs and imports, which fall squarely within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. However, in order to expedite this legislation for floor consideration, the Committee will forgo action on this bill. This is being done with the understanding that it does not in any way prejudice the Committee with respect to the appointment of conferees or its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation. I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming this understanding with respect to H.J. Res. 63, and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration. Best regards, Bill Thomas, Chairman.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, this resolution recognizes and remembers the victims of one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century, namely, the more than 5 million men, women and children in Ukraine who were deliberately starved to death by the Soviet regime in the terrible decade of the 1930s. That regime perpetrated many horrors in its seven decades of existence, but surely this must rank among its most damnable. It is important to stress that this famine was not a natural phenomenon, but was instead deliberately engineered. Virtually all sustenance in the targeted area was seized, even as the availability of food elsewhere in the Soviet Union remained sufficient to prevent the famine. The export of grain never ceased even at the height of the death tolls. Nor was this the result of mere indifference to life, but an uncaring regime. Soviet troops and secret police forces were deployed to forcibly prevent the starving population from leaving the area in the desperate search for food. A sentence of mass death had been pronounced and was mercilessly enforced. The purpose of the artificial famine was to break resistance to the regime's policy of forced collectivization of agriculture, but this was coupled with a murderous determination to destroy Ukraine's national identity, which the regime considered as a mortal threat to its empire and, therefore, brutally suppressed. There is a legacy of shame that the West must bear. Many prominent Westerners, including journalists and scholars who had firsthand knowledge of the famine, deliberately falsified their reporting to cover up and refute evidence of the tragedy in order to suppress criticism of the Soviet regime. We know their actions were deliberate because they confessed their knowledge at the time to confidantes and to their diaries. The most notorious of these was Walter Duranty, a correspondent for The New York Times who had won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting from the Soviet Union. But he was far from alone. Those few who accurately reported on the famine were subject to considerable abuse from their colleagues and others in the West, and their reports were generally disregarded. That lamentable record continued until after the fall of the Soviet regime in 1991, with Robert Conquest's book, The Harvest of Sorrow, being a lonely exception. In remembering and honoring the victims, I must stress that in addition to millions of ethnic Ukrainians, the dead included large numbers from many other ethnic groups, including Russians, Jews, and a host of others large and small. It is also important to note that other areas of the Soviet Union were also subjected to this man-made famine, especially those neighboring regions where an estimated 1\1/2\ million people of many ethnic origins were starved to death. This tragedy knew no artificial divisions, no insulating borders, no refuge. All who perished were equal in their innocence, but the blow fell heaviest in Ukraine. I would like to take this opportunity to praise the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) for his resolution on the famine in Ukraine, H. Res. 254. His has long been one of the most important and influential voices in Congress for ensuring that Ukraine and its people remain prominent in our thoughts, and we owe him our gratitude for his many labors. Ukraine's reermergence in 1991 from the Soviet prison house was of momentous significance, not merely for Ukraine, but for the entire world, because its independence signaled the death of that empire. But I regret to say that Ukraine's great and continuing importance to the United States and to the West remains largely unmeasured here. For an independent Ukraine is an indispensable element in ensuring the freedom and security of Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals. Our interests and those of the West as a whole require that Ukraine complete its transformation into a true democracy; that it establish a vibrant economy equal to its national and natural wealth and the talents of its people; and that it assume its rightful place in the Western community of nations. Although we can provide assistance towards these ends, the first two must remain largely the responsibility of the Ukrainian people. But Urkaine's accession to the institutions of the West can only occur with our active support and encouragement. It is my hope we will have the wisdom to understand our own interests and will act to secure these with permanence. Our long-delayed recognition of Ukraine's suffering is also a recognition of its emergence from darkness and the reestablishment of its independence and is one more step in extending to it our embrace. Let us remember that as we now honor the victims of a terrible past that it is hopefully gone forever. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H. Res. 356, the resolution under consideration.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for their extraordinarily generous remarks, and I wish to say the sentiment that animated those is indeed reciprocated.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 356) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the man-made famine that occurred in Ukraine in 1932-1933.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter) for yielding me this time and for introducing this important resolution, as well as for all his work and leadership on the Committee on International Relations. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to join in the celebration of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, who is marking his Silver Jubilee as the spiritual leader of more than one billion Catholics around the world. On October 16, 1978, Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, the Archbishop of Krakow, was elected Pope. This cardinal, little known outside of his native Poland, addressed a crowd of over 200,000 in St. Peter's Square that day and emotionally expressed his fears about the awesome responsibility of being chosen for such a position. He also told the world that day, ``Be not afraid.'' Twenty-five years ago tomorrow, he was installed as the Bishop of Rome and celebrated his first mass as Pope. John Paul II is the 263rd successor of St. Peter. He was the youngest Pope in over a century, the first non-Italian Pope in over 450 years, and the first Slav Pope. This man was formed at a remarkable time in human history. He knew the persecution of oppression and witnessed the false ideologies of the 20th century. He studied for the priesthood in secrecy and lived through the Nazi occupation and Communist subjugation of his native Poland. He was a philosopher, theologian, and pastor. He was instrumental in the demise of the Communist regime in Poland and played an important role in the collapse of communism throughout central and Eastern Europe, which ended the Cold War. The Holy Father has continued to promote freedom and peace throughout the world during his Pontificate, a freedom based on the truth of the ``transcendent dignity'' of each individual human person, the truth that every human being has a dignity that goes beyond Earthly advantages and accomplishments. The Holy Father during his pontificate has expounded Catholic doctrine and the Magisterium of the Church, and has expanded the Second Vatican Council's engagement with modernity and modern culture. He has accounted for the Church's past, and has pushed Catholic teaching into all areas of modern life. Perhaps most importantly for the future, the Holy Father has truly internationalized the Catholic Church. Over the past 25 years, the number of Catholics worldwide has grown from 757 million to over a billion, an increase of over 40 percent. In Africa, the number of Catholics has increased nearly 150 percent, and in Asia, over 80 percent. The Holy Father has internationalized the Roman Curia, Italians controlled half of the top 20 Vatican departments, and today they head only four, and the College of Cardinals, cardinals representing approximately 20 countries, but today represent over 60 countries. He has traveled more extensively throughout the world, more than any predecessor, visiting 129 countries, and more people have seen this one man in person than any other human being in history. His Holiness has reached out in an unprecedented way to peoples of other beliefs and religions all over the world in an effort toward greater understanding, healing and harmony. He has particularly promoted unity among Christian churches, reconciliation with the Jewish people, and a dialogue with Islam. The Holy Father was the first Pope to visit a synagogue and the first to visit a mosque. His Holiness with bestowed with the Congressional Gold Medal January 8, 2001. Last week during the Silver Jubilee celebrations, Cardinal Ratzinger recalled the new Pope's first words 25 years ago. Cardinal Ratzinger was speaking to the Holy Father, ``You said then that you came from a far-away place. But we understood right away that the faith in Jesus Christ that came through your words and your person overcame all distances.'' Through the years, he continued, you have announced God's will without fear, even when it contrasts with what men think and want.'' I consider it an honor to be able to recognize Pope John Paul II on his 25th anniversary, and I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to this devoted spiritual leader and to celebrate with the Holy Father this Jubilee.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dr. Sunil Chand as the new President of the College of DuPage in Glen Ellyn, Illinois. Dr. Chand, who began his new duties in July, is only the fourth president to serve at the college since it opened its doors in 1967. Dr. Chand's career includes teaching and administrative leadership positions in India, his homeland, and in England and the United States. He earned his B.A. and M.A. in English at St. Stephen's College in Delhi, India, where he later taught English. He earned his Doctorate of Literature at Kent State. Dr. Chand held a variety of positions at Triton College in Illinois, including Dean of Arts and Sciences. He also served as Vice President of Academic Services at Richmond College in London, England, before serving as Executive Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs at Cuyahoga Community College District in Cleveland, Ohio. From there, he moved to his new position at the College of DuPage. Therefore, I take great pleasure in welcoming Dr. Chand to the Sixth Congressional District of Illinois, and I wish him and the College of DuPage continued success.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 66) commending the National Endowment for Democracy for its contributions to democratic development around the world on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the National Endowment for Democracy, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to join in the celebration of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, who is marking his Silver Jubilee as the spiritual leader of more than 1 billion Catholics around the world. It was 25 years ago today that Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, the Archbishop of Krakow, was elected Pope--the youngest chosen in a century. This Cardinal, little-known outside of native-Poland, stood before a crowd of 200,000 in St. Peter's Square and emotionally stated that he had been afraid to accept the nomination, but had done so in obedience to Christ. While he came from meager beginnings, he will be remembered for fostering peace throughout the world. This is because His Holiness knows the persecution of oppression. He studied for the priesthood in secrecy and saw those he grew up with killed and victimized due to the Nazi Occupation. He later witnessed firsthand the communist subjugation of his native Poland. Since becoming Pope, he has traveled more extensively throughout the world than any predecessor, during which time he has spread the message of peace, religious freedom, and human dignity. His Holiness was instrumental in the demise of communism in his native Poland, which in turn fostered the spread of democracy throughout the world. His Holiness has reached out in an unprecedented manner to peoples of other beliefs and religions all over the world to establish a dialog which may lead to greater understanding, healing, and harmony, including praying for unity among Christian churches, reconciliation with the Jewish people, and specifically acknowledging those times in which the Catholic Church has failed to act in accordance with its teachings. He has also led a pilgrimage to the Middle East, preaching coexistence, peace, tolerance, and goodwill throughout this historically conflicted territory. His Holiness has used his position as a world leader to become the foremost voice in fostering ties of brotherhood and promoting peace and reconciliation in the world today. His many efforts have invited his being bestowed with the Congressional Medal of Honor on January 8, 2001. I ask my congressional colleagues to join me in paying tribute to this devoted spiritual leader and to celebrate with him this Jubilee.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate that an issue as vital to our national security as the war in Iraq gets embedded in Presidential politics. There is an irony that seeing the bumper stickers which say ``United We Stand,'' that is more a hope than an expectation. The reason we are at war in Iraq, regardless of all the lint-picking and mistakes and the misjudgments and all the discrepancies, boils down to its simplest terms. The strategic threat from a brutal aggressor that was a challenge to the region as well as to ourselves is a matter of record. And we can debate and argue over this point or that point, but Saddam Hussein was a threat to the region and to the United States, and somebody had to exercise leadership and it devolved upon our President and he has done so. However, I do not propose to talk about that aspect of this many-faceted discussion. Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about the very difficult question of loan versus grant. I can say to the chairman how much I would like to vote for this to be a loan. It makes sense. It is the most defensible position one can take on this issue. But I have come to the conclusion that that would be a mistake and that we should make this a grant, and I will try to tell you my reasons. There is a philosopher named Santayana who said something a long time ago, I have never been able to confirm that he said it, but that is the common opinion, those who do not read history are condemned to relive it. World War I brought on the Treaty of Versailles. It was punitive. The reparations and the punishment that we leveled on Germany, however deserved, ended up in the creation of the Nazi Party. Mr. Chairman, the punitive Versailles Treaty imposed upon Germany after World War I resulted in a country rife with poverty and the ground was sown for the Nazi Party, and ultimately in 1933 the election of Adolf Hitler and out of that, of course, came World War II. Now, we learned that lesson because after World War II, instead of imposing punitive measures on the losers, we came up with the Marshall Plan, which was largely grant and not loans. And the result of the Marshall Plan was Europe was rebuilt, Europe flourished; and instead of being a cradle of dissention and war, it became a source of serenity and peace. And so it would seem to me if we impose on Iraq, which already has $200 billion in debt, another how-many-billions more in debt and then demand that we be repaid, we are not purchasing freedom with that. We are purchasing another dissident country with people who have one more reason to hate us because we are imposing a burden on them. Now, another reason it seems to me is the example we set. We are the leader of the free world whether we like it or not. History has imposed that on us. And if we loan money, other countries are going to loan and add to the debt and add to the misery that Iraq has already undergone. I think if we make a grant, other countries will follow our lead, there is going to be a donors' conference in Madrid later this month, and I think the example we set will result in other countries making a contribution. Now, it is important for this reason: one way we can get our money back or at least have our burden lessened is by other countries contributing to the rebuilding of Iraq. They will not do that if we loan the money. They will do that. Other countries will follow our example; and if they do, they can pick up some of the burden that we are at this point perhaps going to have to assume. Now, Ambassador Bremer has pointed out that creating a sovereign democratic prosperous Iraq is a real blow to the terrorists, and that is our aim. We cannot go to war and then turn on a dime and walk out. We will create a cesspool for terrorists and another problem area, and we are buying difficulty for the future. Things are better in Iraq. The schools are open. The hospitals are open, a free press, utilities coming back on, infrastructure being repaired, a governing council, writing a constitution. There are some 30 countries standing with us. No, they are not in large numbers, but about 20,000, which is a sizable group, British, Polish, Spanish, Czechs and many others. And so we are in this war. It is a war that deserves our support. And I hope that this House will not burden Iraq which already has tremendous burdens and lots of debt with additional debt, but that we show the way for the rest of the world to make their contributions and truly have a united front.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I believe that if God finds a person more useless than me, He will do even greater things through her because this work is His--Mother Teresa. Pope John Paul II will beatify Mother Teresa of Calcutta on October 19, 2003. The ceremony will take place in Rome after the shortest beatification process in modern history, a testament to the remarkable life and spirit of Mother Teresa. Born in Macedonia, Mother Teresa became a Roman Catholic nun in 1928, which brought her to India where she taught school while living in a convent in Calcutta. Surrounded by human suffering of staggering proportions, Mother Teresa was moved to extend her commitment beyond the classroom and convent and began her lifelong ministrations to the destitute, sick and dying. She selflessly dedicated her life to alleviating the pain and suffering of the poorest of the poor. Embracing the destitute in the spirit of love and sacrifice, she came to be known as the ``Saint of the Gutters.'' Her good works inspired people throughout the world and from all walks of life to join her in caring for the poor and suffering, and inspired many young women to follow her in establishing a religious order, The Missionaries of Charity. Prior to Mother Teresa's death in 1997, The Missionaries of Charity had grown remarkably to 517 missions in more than 100 countries with 5,000 sisters in her order. The Missionaries of Charity have also produced the Fruit of Contemplative Brothers and Fathers: the lay missionaries and coworkers of Mother Teresa. Mother Teresa saw the spirit of God in each human being, which led to her tireless efforts around the world, as her fame grew, on behalf of all human life. ``Among the works that flowed from Mother Teresa's heart, one of the most important is the adoption movement'' (the words of Pope John Paul II). She not only administered to the dying, she saved thousands of young lives. Later in her life, the spirit of human life moved her to minister to those afflicted with HIV/AIDS. Though Roman Catholic, Mother Teresa's work embraced all persons regardless of religion, race or nationality. In turn, her work achieved international acceptance and appreciation, transcending religious and political boundaries. At her death, in recognition of her life's work serving its poor, its sick, and its dying, predominantly Hindu India accorded her state honors. Mother Teresa was an honorary American citizen, a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 and the Medal of Freedom in 1985. But above all, Mother Teresa was a loving, pious servant to the poor throughout the world. Mother Teresa's life's work of relieving the suffering of the poor is carried on today by The Missionaries of Charity and by her example of a worldly life illuminated by divine grace. Her greatest contribution, however, may be her spiritual enrichment of us all.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill, H.R. 1950, the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, cross-references, and punctuation, and to make such stylistic, clerical, technical, conforming, and other changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the House in amending the bill.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that Crane amendment No. 25, Burton of Indiana amendment No. 18 and Dreier amendment No. 38 be modified in the form I have caused to be placed at the desk.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, by working together, I believe we will be able to resolve this matter in a manner that is satisfactory to all parties concerned.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, increasingly, foreign governments have been lobbying localities in the United States to accept their consular cards as valid identification. At least two countries now issue consular cards in the U.S. for these purposes and many others are planning to do so. No standards govern those cards, and there is little information on which localities can rely in deciding whether to accept a country's consular card. All this amendment does is clarify the Secretary of State's power to ensure that issuance of these cards is rational and safe. By authorizing the Secretary of State to regulate these cards and setting requirements that countries must meet in issuing the cards, this amendment will allow localities to make informed decisions on whether to accept such documents. Regulation of the cards will also protect the American people from the risks that unregulated and unreliable documents pose. Those risks were underscored recently by the FBI, which determined that because of their vulnerability to fraud and forgery, these cards pose criminal threats as well as a potential terrorist threat. The requirements in this amendment will address those threats by deterring fraud and improving the reliability of consular identification cards. The amendment also provides an enforcement mechanism that empowers the Secretary of State to regulate consulates' compliance with these requirements. It is appropriate to vest this responsibility in the State Department. Not only does its Office of Foreign Missions currently regulate the activities of foreign consulates in the U.S. but the Department will also bring to this role its expertise in evaluating foreign documents. This amendment is needed to allow the State Department necessary authority to regulate foreign consulates in a changing environment. For this reason, I urge passage of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I just would like to respond to my friend from New Jersey who every time someone offers an amendment or a bill trying to get a handle on illegal immigration, known as undocumented, where we have God knows how many people in this country living in substandard style because of the illegality of their presence, and it could be in the millions, it does not mean there is some antipathy toward a racial group or an ethnic group at all. It is just a feeble attempt to get a handle on the borders of our country and who is here and who is not. The problem is not getting better. It is getting worse. But trying to do something about it in good faith does not manifest the hostility at all. We are all immigrants sooner or later or back far enough, but I really resent the conclusion the gentleman draws that all Republicans do not like people of different ethnicity. I would say just the opposite.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I have some reservations about this amendment. This points out a serious problem which is actually ongoing with not just India but some other countries as well. However, I am willing to accept this amendment and will do so with pleasure.