Henry Hyde

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes, and I am very pleased to offer an amendment to the USA PATRIOT Reauthorization Act which deals with the new reality of overlapping links between illicit narcotics and global terrorism. Evidence of this deadly and emerging symbiotic relationship is overwhelming. My amendment creates a new crime that will address and punish those who would use these illicit narcotics to promote and support terrorism. The Committee on International Relations recently held a hearing on Afghanistan in which our well-informed Drug Enforcement Administration conservatively estimated that nearly half of the formerly designated foreign terrorist organizations have links to illicit narcotics. It has been widely reported that the Madrid train terrorist bombings were partially financed by hashish money. In Colombia, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and the AUC, which are two of these FTOs, thrive on the drug trade, supporting and sustaining themselves with illicit proceeds. My amendment, recognizing this new and deadly reality, makes it a Federal crime under the Controlled Substance Import and Export Act to engage in drug trafficking that directly or indirectly aids or provides support, resources, or any pecuniary value to a foreign terrorist organization or any person or group planning, preparing for, or carrying out a terrorist offense. The amendment provides very tough penalties, consistent with the serious nature of this crime. As provided in my amendment, it will no longer be necessary for our overworked DEA and other law enforcement agencies abroad to be looking for a U.S. nexus to illicit drug shipments and drug traffickers who are engaging in this deadly trade which supports global terrorism. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment which will give the tools to our law enforcement personnel in their ongoing global fight against terrorism. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, very briefly, a mandatory minimum sentence covers two crimes. It covers dealing narcotics and facilitating and enabling terrorism. It seems to me a modest sentence of 20 years for those two heinous crimes. There is a definite link between the illicit narcotics trade and the financing of terrorism. We have taken a focused look at that link, and this is an attempt to disrupt it and destroy it. The gentleman from Virginia uses the term ``common sense.'' I think it is the utmost of common sense for us to address the flourishing of illicit drug trade and its link with narcoterrorism, so I respectfully hope that the Members will support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, we are prepared to continue to work with the gentleman from California and the administration in order to protect the national interests broadly considered and help Egypt achieve the economic and political reform it needs.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to take the time in opposition, although I do not oppose this amendment.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that we are delighted to accept this amendment. It is a far-reaching visionary help to public diplomacy, an area where we can use all the help in the world possible. I want to congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) on producing this very useful, important amendment. And we are delighted to accept it. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

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

Mr. HYDE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise only to say we are very pleased to accept this excellent amendment. We hope it passes.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, you know, in all contentious discussions, there are a set of imaginary barricades, and people get on one side or on the other. On one side of the barricades, the hypothetical barricades, are people's main concern of prison welfare. They introduce amendments, they focus their time and attention on the welfare of the prisoners. On the other side of the barricade are people who focus on winning the war, who focus on the beheadings that have happened to decent and good people from the enemy. They focus on the assassinations, on the car bombings, that indiscriminately kill elderly people and children. And so you have to decide what side of the barricade you are on. Now, you can say that is a criticism of your patriotism. Not at all. Not at all. But you just have to listen to this debate to know the overriding concern of some is the welfare of the prisoners. Other people want to win the war. Count me among the latter. Another issue that I think is worthy of comment, we have heard a couple of speakers from the other side, more than a couple, say this information is corrupt, falsification of intelligence, outright deception by the administration. I have, in my hand, ``Famous Last Words,'' a compendium of quotations from famous Democrats and famous people about the war that I think would be worth recalling. The gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), my good friend, said on October 10, 2002, ``Saddam, with a nuclear weapon, is too horrifying to contemplate, too terrifying to tolerate.'' The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) of the Intelligence Committee said this, October 9, 2002: ``The threat from Iraq is very real, increasingly dangerous. Saddam's belligerent intentions and his possession and ongoing development of weapons of mass destruction to fulfill those intentions make him a clear present danger to the United States and the world.'' Oh, you should read some of these. Here is one from the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey): ``The threat that we confront is Saddam Hussein. Saddam is in a category of his own. No other head of state has been the subject of an 11-year campaign to disarm and sanction him. He has invaded two of his neighbors, assassinated 16 of his own family, tried to assassinate former President Bush, lied about his weapons buildup, fired missiles at Israel, and gassed his own people. The prospect that such a despot has biological and chemical weapons, anthrax, sarin gas, smallpox and is nearing nuclear capability is a looming threat to millions. We, as a Nation, have the responsibility to stop him.'' October 10, 2002 Congressional Record. I have got quotes here from Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, President Clinton, all warning of nuclear weaponry, weapons of mass destruction. Were they corrupt? Were they misleading? No, they were basing their judgment on the best intelligence available, and they relied on it and it turned out to be flawed. But do not accuse people of deception and corruption when it was widespread and well before the World Trade Center.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I might note parenthetically that in the motion to recommit, it says ``to provide U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq in a timely manner with the equipment and other resources needed to do their job.'' I also take note that the supplemental 2 months ago had 54 Democrats voting ``no.'' That is what you use to pay for the war. So to demand resources and to refuse to pay for them is curious. The motion to recommit proceeds from mistaken premises. The erroneous premise is the administration has not presented a strategy for victory and has not provided the military with the tools to do the job. The fact is the administration has been crystal clear in presenting its plan for victory, and to those who keep saying there is not such a plan, I ask you to take pen and pencil out and write this down: one, defeat the enemy, working with the coalition and Iraqi forces; two, train the Iraqi security forces so they can take on the burden of protecting themselves; and, three, set the conditions for political and economic growth in Iraq. If the other side has not heard of this plan, which has been articulated again and again, it is because they were not listening, or maybe they prefer having an issue to hearing what is being said. Now, a date certain. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) said he was not looking for a precise date. But many on his side are. I ask you to use your imagination and imagine it is June 4, 1940, and you are in the House of Commons rather than Congress. Winston Churchill is talking, and he says this: ``Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender,'' until July 22, which is the cut-off date in the resolution. Vote for this resolution.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 2 be modified by the form I have placed at the desk.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Madam Chairman, someone once said brevity is the soul of eloquence. I shall attempt to emulate that by saying we are happy to accept this excellent amendment.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, today we will be considering H.R. 2601, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007 or as it is commonly referred to, the State Department Authorization Bill. The bill includes several requests from the administration which are oriented toward improving the operations of the Department or the quality of life for those serving in our embassies in missions abroad. This bill authorizes funding for the State Department international organizations, international commissions, refugee programs and various related authorizations. This measure also authorizes a variety of foreign assistance programs and speaks to many current international issues to include a review of our strategic export controls. Given the unparalleled threat to the United States and to the world from the continued proliferation of nuclear weapons, strengthening our nuclear nonproliferation efforts is an important piece of this legislation. The bill states that U.S. national interests would be advanced by a stronger International Atomic Energy Agency including and ensuring that the delay in the U.S. annual payment is corrected, along with various other recommendations. H.R. 2601 authorizes $10.8 billion for fiscal year 2006 and is essentially within the President's fiscal year 2006 budget request for State Department and foreign aid accounts. Public diplomacy activities are fully supported in this bill. While we support the traditional methods of reaching foreign audiences, we strongly urge State to be creative in finding the most effective program mix for any given country. In closing, this bill reflects contributions of the administration as well as the Republican and Democratic members of the Committee on International Relations. We bring a solid bill to the House floor. I urge its adoption.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I have enclosed a series of letters concerning committee jurisdiction on the bill, H.R. 2601, ``To authorize appropriations for the Department of State for fiscal years 2006 and 2007, and for other purposes.'' Committee on International Relations, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, July 13, 2005. Hon. Peter Hoekstra, Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House of Representatives, The Capitol, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning H.R. 2601, a bill to authorize appropriations for the Department of State for Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007, and for other purposes. The Committee on International Relations has marked up the bill and ordered it reported by a unanimous vote. There are certain provisions within the version of the legislation ordered reported by the Committee which fall within the shared Rule X jurisdiction of your Committee. Specifically, I refer to the language concerning the amendments to Section 140 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (22 U.S.C. 2656f), relating to comparability standards for the Annual Patterns of Global Terrorism Report required under Section 22 U.S.C. 2656(a). In the interest of permitting this Committee to proceed expeditiously to the floor consideration of this bill, I request your Committee waive its right to sequential referral on this matter. I understand that such a waiver only applies to this language in this bill, and not to the underlying subject matter. I will urge the Speaker of the House of Representatives to name Members of your Committee to any conference committee which is named to consider this bill. I appreciate your willingness to allow us to proceed. I will insert this exchange of letters into the Congressional Record during the debate on this bill. Sincerely, Henry J. Hyde, Chairman.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

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

Mr. HYDE. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2601.