Henry Hyde

Mr. HYDE

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

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, we got an awful lot done in this committee because of the great cooperation of the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and his staff; and I deeply appreciate it, particularly on this bill.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach).

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that each side be granted an additional 6 minutes for purposes of debate.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe). (Mr. Kolbe asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2069) to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to authorize assistance to prevent, treat, and monitor HIV/AIDS in sub- Saharan African and other developing countries, as amended.

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

Mr. HYDE. Madam 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. Madam Speaker, once again the United States has an opportunity, and the responsibility, to lead the world in confronting one of the most compelling humanitarian and moral challenges facing us today. I speak of the HIV/AIDS pandemic, a crisis unparalleled in modern times and one that threatens the entire world, embracing developed and developing countries alike. The statistics are chilling: over 22 million people have already died of AIDS throughout the world. More than 3 million died last year alone. That is over 8,000 deaths each day, or nearly one death every 6 minutes. What is most alarming is that the number of infections and deaths is growing and the pandemic is quickly spreading from sub- Saharan Africa to India, China and Russia. An incredible 36 million people are already infected with HIV; and 15,000 new infections occur every day. To illustrate the magnitude of the crisis, it is estimated that by the year 2010, over 80 million people may have died from AIDS. By comparison, that is more than all the military and civilian deaths resulting from World War II. If the disease is left unchecked, we have no idea what the statistics will be in 2015 or 2020, less than 20 years from today. The most dramatic increase in infection rates is in the developing world, where education, awareness and access to health care is most seriously lacking. As is too often the case, it is the children who suffer most. Millions are born HIV-infected even though mother-to- child transmission is easily avoided if adequate training and health care is provided. To this is added a widespread mortality among parents: by the end of the decade, 40 million children are likely to be orphaned as a consequence of AIDS. The impact on developing societies, socially, politically and economically, is incalculable and threatens the stability of many countries and societies around the globe. Contrary to popular conceptions, the pandemic is not limited to Africa, where AIDS continues to sweep forward virtually unchecked. The disease has jumped to every continent. In Europe, last year Russia had the highest rate of increase of new cases of any country on the planet. That impoverished country's medical system is clearly unable to adequately cope with the challenge, ensuring that it will continue to spread. According to the National Intelligence Council, India is on the verge of a catastrophic AIDS epidemic. Closer to home, the Caribbean region has the second highest rate of HIV infections in the world. The most appropriate comparison of this ever-widening threat is with the 14th century, when the plague repeatedly swept through Europe, killing a quarter of that continent's population, leaving no country untouched, and decimating entire regions. This time, however, it is the entire world that is at risk. If the world is to have a chance of prevailing against this disease, the United States must take a leading role in the efforts to combat it. To do so, we must advance along many fronts, both bilateral and multilateral. The bill we consider today, H.R. 2069, addresses both the bilateral and multilateral pillars of our response to the AIDS crisis. H.R. 2069 builds upon existing efforts by authorizing the Agency for International Development to carry out a comprehensive program of HIV/ AIDS prevention, education and treatment at a level of $485 million during fiscal year 2002. Moreover, Madam Speaker, H.R. 2069 authorizes an additional $50 million pilot program to provide treatment for those infected with HIV/AIDS by helping the public and private sectors of developing countries procure HIV/AIDS pharmaceuticals and antiviral therapies. The novel bilateral treatment program that my bill authorizes is vitally important, for it gives hope to those already suffering from AIDS. By authorizing a pilot treatment program, we can work to extend the productive lives of those infected by the virus. This is not only the right thing to do, it has beneficial impact on treatment as well. Without some expectation of care, the poor have little reason to be tested for AIDS or to seek help. I am fully cognizant of the challenge posed by treatment programs in developing countries. However, it is my hope that successful treatment programs such as those carried out by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation will be replicated in developing countries. Madam Speaker, there simply is no option other than treatment if we are ever to stem the tide of this pandemic. Through our bilateral efforts, the United States will demonstrate its commitment to address all facets of the HIV/AIDS challenge and thereby challenge the entire developed world to emulate the example of the United States. It is also my hope that faith-based organizations such as Catholic Relief Services will play a very significant and meaningful role in advising USAID on the most effective approaches to combat the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In addition to our bilateral efforts, the President has already signaled our Nation's intention to lead the multilateral campaign by committing at least $200 million to combat HIV/AIDS through a global AIDS war chest that will be designed and implemented in the months to come. The Global Access to HIV/AIDS Prevention, Awareness, Education, and Treatment Act of 2001 also authorizes the President to contribute to multilateral efforts to combat HIV/AIDS at a level that the administration deems appropriate and at such time as a fund is established and criteria developed to ensure its sound management. America will contribute its fair share as we work to leverage additional funds for this effort from other developed countries. By providing the President with this flexibility, we can ensure that the contributions made by the United States will be adequate and also yield the commitments from other countries to make this effort a truly global war on AIDS. As with any problem, however, financial resources cannot serve as the sole answer, and the generosity of the American people must be well managed. We must provide resources at a pace at which these can be absorbed and used wisely. We must continue to encourage and support those faith-based organizations and churches that are on the front lines in the effort to educate the poor about HIV and AIDS and treatment and prevention. We must also insist that any program designed to combat the AIDS pandemic include abstinence as a core component. In closing, I wish to thank the many Members and staff who have contributed to the passage of this landmark legislation. I am especially grateful to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) the committee's ranking member, and to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for their leadership in crafting this legislation. I am also appreciative of the invaluable support of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the committee's chairman emeritus; the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter); and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach). I am also very grateful for the generous support offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe). I also wish to thank Nisha Desai, David Abramowitz, Pearl Alice Marsh, and Michael Riggs of the Democratic staff for their many contributions and dedication to make this bill come to fruition. My greatest appreciation, however, goes to Adolfo Franco, a member of my own staff, whose tireless work made this bill a reality. He is leaving the staff to go to a very important job with the administration, and he will be sorely missed. Madam Speaker, I wish to reiterate what I think is a consensus in Congress. Simply stated, the AIDS virus is one of the great moral challenges of our era. It is a scourge of unparalleled proportions in modern times. Every citizen has a stake in preventing what otherwise might well become the bubonic plague of the 21st century. We must do all that lies in our power to do if we are to meet this threat, first of all, by reaching out now to those most in need. It is not only the most sensible thing to do, it is the right thing to do for our children, our country and for the world. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2069. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2001, H.R. 3005, a measure granting Trade Promotion Authority, TPA, to President Bush, an authority which lapsed in 1994. One of the most important votes we will be asked to cast in this Congress, the enactment of this measure is essential to our national interest and our long-term economic growth and prosperity. Without this authority, U.S. negotiators will continue to find themselves outside looking in on trade competitors concluding one trade agreement after another that protects their interests and ignores ours. There are over 130 such preferential agreements in place today and the U.S. is a party to only three. Our trade competitors have clearly taken advantage of our inability to negotiate without this authority. Our NAFTA trade partners, Canada and Mexico, have, for example, signed preferential trade agreements with other countries of South and Central America ensuring that our exporters are at a competitive disadvantage. Our hopes for this hemisphere rest upon the economic advancement of all. And during the past decade there were many positive signs as almost every country in the region embraced the free market and implemented a far-reaching series of economic reforms, thereby laying the foundation for sustained growth. We are only at the beginning of this process, however. Too many in this rich hemisphere remain poor; too many countries remain underdeveloped; and too many workers are denied access to increased economic opportunities. There are many obstacles that need to be overcome in this effort, but one easy way to expand economic opportunity for every country in this hemisphere is to remove its outdated and self-limiting barriers to trade. This is what the Free Trade Area of Americas (FTAA) represents: the recognition that protectionism is a dead end street and that the economic interests of each country are best advanced through cooperation and an openness to the world. President Bush has rightly made the FTAA the centerpiece of U.S. policy towards the hemisphere, but we cannot succeed in this effort without trade promotion authority. We now find ourselves in the ironic situation that the greatest advocates of this agreement are the countries of Central and South America which formerly blockaded themselves virtually every U.S. proposal for expanded cooperation. Now it is they who are knocking on our door, preaching the benefits of cooperation. A ``no'' voted today will only ties the hands of our trade negotiators who are trying to lower tariff and non-tariff barriers, to increase economic opportunity here and abroad, and to jump-start the global economy. NAFTA and the most recent global trade agreement (the ``Uruguay Round'') have saved the average American family $1,300 to $2,000 each year from the combined effect of income increases and lower prices for imports. These two agreements are estimated to have increased overall U.S. national income by approximately $50 billion a year. Many Members, on the Republican as well as Democratic side of the aisle, are concerned, however, that granting the President ``a blank check'' to negotiate trade agreements could compromise our values and set back efforts to reform the World Trade Organization. But the text of the proposed trade legislation clearly spells out our commitment to democracy, improved trade and environmental policies, respect for worker rights and the rights of children consistent with the core labor standards of the International Labor Organization. It also includes our commitment to greater openness and transparency inside the global rule-making body, the World Trade Organization and to much greater public access to its dispute settlement proceedings. For those members who remain unconvinced that the President would put his TPA authority to good use, I emphasize that Congress retains the right to approve or disapprove any trade agreement negotiated under the TPA authority. Any Member can vote down any future trade agreement if he or she feels that it doesn't promote our economic security. Our failure to grant the President this vitally needed authority will lead to the continuing loss of American influence in global trade debates and a continuation of the global economic recession. The U.S. has long been the engine of the global economy and without this key trade authority we will be hard pressed to lead Europe and Asia back onto the growth path of the 1990s. At this critical point in our global anti-terrorism battle, it is also essential, in my view, that we enable the President to build stable trade relationships with our key coalition partners. We can--and should--esnure that the views of our committee are fully taken into account in the drafting of any future trade negotiations, and I will help to ensure that this takes place. Without TPA, we won't have the tools needed to jump start the global economy to help lift us out of economic recession. With TPA, they can finish the task of building a Free Trade Area of the Americas and negotiating a new trade round. With TPA, our President can once again exercise leadership to foster open markets, democracy and economic development. Security and trade issues are increasingly linked. Bringing China, and eventually Russia, into the world trading system will help to ensure that these and other countries will strengthen the rule of law and promote more open economic systems. NATO's role in the world is only as strong as the economies of its members and without TPA and a new round of trade negotiations the global recession is likely to be that much longer and deeper. Support the President and pass H.R. 3005.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, it would also be a pleasure to be with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, well, this has been a stimulating debate, and it has been educational. I would like to respond as much as I can to some of the critics of the resolution. My good friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), describes a resolution which my resolution never was. He wants to head it in the direction of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East, something that has eluded some of the finest minds in the world for hundreds of years, certainly since 1948 with the founding of Israel. Many, many people, including the former President of the United States, spent hours and hours with the parties trying to get peace. Everybody is for peace; but in the words of Patrick Henry, ``Peace, peace, there is no peace.'' So, I did not pretend, I was not arrogant enough to decide I would set out a formula for peace. If I could do that, I certainly would do it. All I am trying to do is respond to the famous lines in Arthur Miller's play, ``Death of a Salesman,'' where Willie Loman's wife, Linda, says, ``A man is dying. Attention must be paid.'' Attention must be paid to what is going on in Israel. How would you like to be a mother, and every day wonder if your little girl going to school will come home with all her limbs, with her life? It is a hellish way to live. I simply was trying to call attention to the horror, the indescribable horror of acts of terrorism, and show solidarity as a co-victim of horrible acts of terrorism. It is American to put your arms around a fellow democracy and not turn your back on them in their hour of need. That is what we were doing. This simply says that when acts of terror occur, attention must be paid. It must be pointed out. We must shout about it, we must make an example of it, we must show the world the horror of what is going on. And maybe, just maybe, one day we will all get so sick of it we will not tolerate it anymore. The gentleman from Michigan sets up a straw man. Not one word about peace. Everything we do is about peace, and objecting to terrorism is about peace, and showing solidarity to the Israeli people and to the Palestinian people. The next time, if any, there is an atrocity, an act of terror by the State of Israel, bring a resolution to the floor. We will debate it. We will debate it. But I have not heard one. I have not seen one. Bring it to the floor and let us debate it.

Mr. HYDE. I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the Palestinian involvement in the atrocity of last Saturday is mentioned, because this focuses on what happened in Jerusalem, when 26 women and children and men were killed and 1,200 were injured. That is what we are talking about. Mr. Speaker, support our expression of solidarity with the victims of this horrible act of terrorism. Support the resolution.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I have no idea. If the staff will bring it to my attention, we will give it the most careful scrutiny. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and I will do it together.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. HYDE. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House leadership would have met with Israeli Prime Minister Sharon in the United States Capitol to discuss the status of the peace process. Instead, he had to return home to Israel, and we are here on the floor of the House joining with the people of Israel in their grief over the losses from the horrific terrorist attack of the past weekend. As Israel buries its dead, comforts its bereaved and begins to heal its wounded, we send through this resolution a signal of sincere condolence and solidarity with the people and the government of the State of Israel. The American people also join in President Bush's forthright expression of support for Israel's right of self-defense. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the President took additional actions to cut off funding for terrorists, funds which originated here in the United States. Hamas is now understood to be a terrorist organization of global reach, even if that reach is mainly from Iran, Syria, or Lebanon into Israel. This resolution calls on Palestinian Authority Chairman Arafat to do what the President's spokesman said he could have done in the past, to really crack down on those who would deliberately murder women, children and men as they go about their business on the streets. We ask the President to act sharply against the Palestinian Authority if it does not heed our request. This is not an action we should rush to take, because the Palestinian people have chosen Chairman Arafat as their leader, and it is important that we maintain a relationship with him if at all possible. But as we do not provide aid to the Palestinian Authority itself, we cannot cut off assistance as a way of showing displeasure. A customary way of showing extreme displeasure with a foreign authority is to cut off our diplomatic relationship and compel some or all of their envoys to return home. It seems clear that the actions or inaction of the Palestinian Authority to date merit the President's taking all appropriate actions, which could include the cutting off of our quasi-diplomatic relationship should we not see some serious action on their part. Mr. Speaker, I believe that Chairman Arafat has a historic role to play. He needs to lead his people by stopping the violence and beginning the negotiating process. He needs to do this not because we asked him to, not because of Israel's interest, but the interests of his own people. He needs to clearly convey to his people that the way of violence is not the way forward. I sincerely hope he chooses the path of peace, takes risks for peace, and finds a way out of his present dilemma. The United States and its friends can and should do all it can to help him, but the choice ultimately is one that he and his colleagues must make and take responsibility for. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

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. Con. Res. 280, the resolution under consideration.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to divide my time with the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 280) expressing solidarity with Israel in the fight against terrorism.