Henry Hyde

Mr. HYDE

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. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to my distinguished friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), for whom I have enormous admiration, that he has a much more spacious view of the purpose of this resolution. We do not pretend to have an answer to the Middle East conflict; and I pray that if the gentleman does, he will come forward with it so that peace might be moved closer in that troubled part of the world. What this resolution does is a very narrow, simple thing, and that is it shows solidarity with the Israeli people who were victimized on December 1 with an atrocity, namely the killing of 26 people, randomly, in a shopping mall, and the wounding of at least 175 of them, in the wake of what happened to our country on the 11th of September in the worst act of terrorism in recorded history in the memory of man. So Israel and the United States are both victims of a terrible act of terrorism; and in that co-victimhood we attempt to show solidarity. That is not a mindless thing; it is not an empty gesture. It focuses on this new form of war, which is beyond contempt. I think that is very useful and necessary. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor). (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, 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. Chairman, this amendment is intended to protect the men and women of our Armed Forces from the risk of criminal prosecution by the U.N. International Criminal Court. This is a new court. It has not yet come into existence, but it predictably will, because it is getting ratification from the 60 countries that is necessary, so we should face the fact that this is going to be a reality. Now, once this court is operating, it will claim jurisdiction to prosecute the men and women of our Armed Forces, as well as officials of our government, for alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity, et cetera, even though our country has not and will not ratify the treaty establishing the court. The court is a threat to the sovereignty of our Nation. Its claim of criminal jurisdiction over our citizens directly conflicts with the supremacy clause of our Constitution, and any Americans prosecuted by this court will be without the protections guaranteed them by our Bill of Rights, beginning with the right to trial by jury. For those of us who are committed to protecting our Constitution, and we have heard many such voices during our debate on the terrorism bill just a few weeks ago, the first place to begin is with the International Criminal Court. Terrorists, like the suicide bombers who attacked our Nation on September 11, will not be deterred by the threat that if caught and successfully prosecuted they may be sentenced to life imprisonment, because that is the highest penalty the international court can impose. But U.S. military personnel and their civilian and military commanders will have to worry a great deal about the threat of criminal prosecution by the court. As a result, if the court were in existence today, the U.S. military operations currently underway in Afghanistan would have to be reconfigured in order to avoid the risk of criminal prosecution by the court. It is imperative that we in Congress do everything within our power to ensure that our Nation's ability to respond to terrorists and others who threaten us is not circumscribed by the U.N. court operating in conflict with the Constitution. The purpose of my amendment prohibits the use of funds appropriated in this act to support or assist any activity of the International Criminal Court. I wish the Rules of the House permitted me to offer a broader amendment, because I think it is important to permanently prohibit any form of U.S. support to or cooperation with the International Criminal Court, not just support or cooperation by the Department of Defense, but any government agency in the United States. On September 25, the administration informed us it supports a revised version of the American Servicemembers' Protection Act that a number of us negotiated with the administration. That revised language was based on a bill, H.R. 1794, that was introduced on May 10 of this year by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) and myself. The text of that bill was approved by the House as a floor amendment on May 10 by a vote of 282 to 137. I hope that in conference the agreed language that we have worked out with the administration can be submitted with the text of my amendment, because I believe that our agreed language will better protect military personnel from the threat of prosecution by the International Criminal Court. Mr. Chairman, the Constitution protects Americans. To put Americans outside the protection of the Constitution in a court that does not permit jury trials is an abandonment of one of the core indicia of citizenship. It is not a good idea, and I hope my amendment is adopted. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3009, ``The Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act,'' a measure to extend and enhance the Andean Trade Preference Act. Signed into law in December of 1991, this underlying legislation has been instrumental in promoting economic development and economic alternatives to coca cultivation in four Andean trading partners and allies in the war on drugs, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. It has provided improved access and duty free treatment for a wide variety of Andean exports into our market, and, according to a number of reports issued by the International Trade Commission, has helped to encourage the export of several nontraditional products, thereby raising the standard of living in rural areas in some recipient drug- producing countries. Over the past ten years, the Andean Trade Preference Act has played a vital role in the effort to combat the production of illicit drugs. All of the world's cocaine comes from the Andean ridge and in recent years more than 60 percent of the heroin sold or seized on our streets comes from the Colombian Andes. The success of our anti-drug efforts in these Andean countries directly affects our domestic security and the future of millions of Americans. By passing this measure today, we can bolster these efforts by creating thousands of jobs in legitimate industries and sectors that can benefit from duty-free entry into the United States. To further enhance the effectiveness of this legislation, I would urge all the countries of the region to take all possible steps to enhance the climate for foreign investment in their domestic markets. Particularly in regard to Colombia, I would urge the government to resolve as quickly as possible its investment dispute with TermoRio, including its major U.S. stockholder, Sithe Energies. I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record recent correspondence on this dispute that was sent to the United States Trade Representative, the Honorable Robert B. Zoellick. I would also point out that this legislation includes several important enhancements to the African Growth and Opportunity Act-- promoting economic development and creating thousands of jobs in sub- Saharan Africa. The African Growth and Opportunity Act, enacted as part of the Trade and Development Act of 2000, has already promoted greater trade and investment between the U.S. and sub-Saharan Africa, boosting trade with that region by 50% last year, creating scores of new businesses and tens of thousands of new jobs from Kenya to South Africa. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure which would further strengthen these trade and investment links, laying a solid foundation to our long-term relationship with the countries of sub-Saharan Africa and South America.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, today, with this resolution, the House welcomes a friend, the Prime Minister of India, His Excellency Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The Prime Minister is in Washington in the course of visits to several capitals to emphasize India's longstanding commitment to fight terrorism. This is a matter on which we can all agree. America and India need to step up our security and political cooperation; India's importance to world security is obvious to anyone who possesses a map. Of course, Indians and Americans agree on many other subjects, especially on the benefits of democracy and human rights and on the benefits of trade. American-Indian relations have been getting better for many years, following the steady, upward path of bilateral trade. The fact that more and more individuals of Indian ancestry are contributing to our society, becoming citizens, and taking part in civic and business endeavors is another factor that contributes mightily to our improving relationship. As this trend continues, Americans get to know Indian culture and Indians are more likely to have friends and relatives in this country and have a realistic picture of life here. The United States wants to help India and its neighbors live in peace in a stable South Asia. It has become clear that, in the first instance, this will require the extirpation of al Qaida and the defeat of those who harbor it, the Taliban. India and Pakistan, rivals and sometimes enemies, are on the same side in this endeavor. I pray that they will take the opportunity to achieve some level of confidence in one another in a common struggle. I hope that American leadership will help bring them together wherever we can in fact be of assistance. Mr. Speaker, this is an important visit. The Indian Prime Minister is a most welcome guest, and one whom we are most pleased to honor with this resolution.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, this bill calls upon the NATO alliance to agree to a robust second round of enlargement at its summit meeting in Prague late next year. The bill does not call for the admission of any specific country to NATO, but is broadly supportive of all seven leading contenders for admission in the next round: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. I will not dwell on the qualifications of the individual countries, other than to say each has made great progress in the difficult transition from the prison house of communism to the promise of democracy in the free market. Forcibly separated from the West for decades, each is now reclaiming its rightful place in the Western community of nations. It would be shameful, as well as stupid, for us to ignore their pleas to become members of the Atlantic alliance. For over half a century, NATO has been the foundation upon which the security of the West has rested. NATO's continuing importance to the United States was most recently demonstrated in this unified response to the terrorist attacks of September 11 when article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which states that an attack on one member of NATO shall be considered an attack upon them all, was invoked for the first time in the alliance's history. It is my hope that this next phase of NATO's enlargement will see an end to Russia's opposition to NATO, an opposition needlessly inherited from the Soviet Union and inconsistent with Russia's own desire to become a part of the West. For this reason, I commend President Putin for his recent remarks indicating his government will not object to further enlargement of NATO. A robust second round of NATO enlargement will not end our task. Many vocal aspirants will still remain outside of the alliance's pacifying embrace. And in a speech earlier this year in Warsaw, President Bush spoke of a future in which all of the states between the Baltic and Black Seas would be welcomed into the Western community of nations. I certainly share that vision. Thus, even as we admit additional countries to NATO, we must remember this is but the latest step toward our goal of creating a Europe whole and free, and of bringing lasting peace to that ancient and long- suffering continent.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, it is with a sense of profound sadness and a touch of nostalgia and deep admiration that I take the floor today to speak about a man who served his country and this House with vigor distinction. Jerry Solomon was a man who took the concept of service to country to its highest plan. He was deeply committed to keeping America the bastion of democracy which the founding fathers envisioned. As anyone who met Jerry knows, he served proudly, and with great honor in the United States Marines. Semper Fi was more than just a slogan to Jerry. He took those words to be his code of conduct both in the Marines and later as a Member of the House. It was a true badge of dignity and commitment for him. When Jerry was elected to Congress, he was exultant in having found another way to serve his country. While he was dedicated to the constituents who so wisely chose to send him to Congress, he was ever mindful of the responsibilities he bore as a United States Congressman. He realized that every vote he made, and every action he took, affected the nation as a whole. While some Members find this responsibility to be a heavy burden, Jerry relished in having the opportunity to do things to make America a better place to live and work and a stronger example of the glories of our democracy. When he became chairman of the Committee on Rules, Jerry's responsibilities expanded. He was clearly up to the task. He took this extra assignment knowing how important it would be, but also well aware of the enhanced burden it would carry. Jerry managed to walk the tightrope of being a fair and equitable chairman, and still keeping the mission of the majority in mind. He was a key member of leadership, and used that position to continue his never ending quest for a better America. The House has lost a tremendous asset, I have a lost friend, and this nation has lost a great patriot. How comforting it would be in these times of national stress to have Jerry here to lead and inspire us in all the challenges ahead. When someone you love dies, he is no longer where he was--he is with you, in your heart and memory. Rather than mourn our loss let us be glad he lived and we knew him. My deepest sympathy to his wife and his family--especially his daughter Linda.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am pleased that the House is considering H.R. 2272, the Coral Reef and Coastal Marine Conservation Act of 2001, a bill introduced by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) and cosponsored by the distinguished chairman emeritus of the Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman); the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the vice chairman, and the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega). Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2272 authorizes $10 million for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2005 to build upon the environmental and conservation programs of the Enterprise for the Americas Initiative and the Tropical Forest Conservation Act that was recently marked up by the Committee on International Relations, passed by Congress, and enacted into law by the President. In simple terms, Madam Speaker, the Coral Reef and Coastal Marine Conservation Act helps to protect the world's dwindling coral reefs through debt-for-nature swaps, debt buy-backs, or debt restructuring instruments. This successful program, which is modeled on former President Bush's innovative Enterprise for the Americas initiative, is another creative example of how we can address developing country debt while helping to protect our planet's environment. Madam Speaker, this bill gives the President the authority to reduce certain forms of debt owed to the United States in exchange for the deposit by eligible developing countries of local currencies in a coral reef facility to preserve, restore, and maintain coral reefs throughout the developing world. These funds are used by qualified non-governmental organizations working to preserve the world's most endangered coral reefs. This program is overseen by a board of directors in the United States that is comprised of U.S. public and private officials; and the board, in turn, annually reports to Congress on the progress made to implement the program's objectives. I am pleased that key U.S. Government agencies, including the State and Treasury Departments, as well as the Inter-American Foundation, are members of the Enterprise for America's board and charged with the oversight of these programs. In closing, I wish to commend the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) for his leadership, vision, and dedication in promoting and expanding conservation efforts in the developing world. I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 2272. I congratulate and appreciate the opportunity to work with the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) on this bill, as well as all bills. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Madam 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 the bill under consideration.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the learned gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I should very much like to associate myself with the trenchant remarks of the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos). Madam Speaker, having no more speakers, I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2272) to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to provide for debt relief to developing countries who take action to protect critical coral reef habitats, as amended.

Mr. HYDE

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

Mr. HYDE. Madam 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 S. 1465.

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1465) to authorize the President to exercise waivers of foreign assistance restrictions with respect to Pakistan through September 30, 2003, and for other purposes.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 217) recognizing the historic significance of the fiftieth anniversary of the alliance between Australia and the United States under the ANZUS Treaty, paying tribute to the United States-Australia relationship, reaffirming the importance of economic and security cooperation between the United States and Australia, and welcoming the state visit by Australian Prime Minister John Howard, as amended.

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

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

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, of the United States' many formal relationships around the world, our alliance with Australia is among the most important and enduring. This year, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of that alliance, one which I am pleased to say is as strong today as when the ANZUS Treaty was signed half a century ago. But the bonds connecting the United States and Australia are far deeper than those outlined in a simple piece of paper, regardless of its undoubted importance. We share common origins, common political institutions and governing principles, a common commitment to peace and freedom around the world. That commitment was tested many times in the past century, when Australian and U.S. forces fought side by side in a series of conflicts from World War I and World War II to the wars in Vietnam and the Persian Gulf. Many of the fallen share common graves. Today, we recognize not only the past importance of our alliance with Australia but its continuing significance in a new century of unfamiliar challenges and unplumbed dangers. The strength of that alliance was newly demonstrated in the wake of the terrorist attacks on America September 11 when our Australian ally immediately pledged its unconditional support for the United States. That support included the decision by the Australian government to invoke article IV of the ANZUS Treaty which commits both countries to cooperate in responding to an attack. I should note this was the first time that article IV has been jointly invoked in the 50-year history of the ANZUS alliance. In this new century, the United States and Australia will have need of reliable friends and proven allies. The knowledge that we do not face our challenges alone, that we will meet them with steadfast partners such as Australia, is of incalculable importance and reassurance to the United States. It is for these and other reasons that I call up this resolution, recognizing the historic significance of the 50th anniversary of the alliance between Australia and the United States under the ANZUS Treaty. I look forward to the day when we will celebrate the first century of that alliance. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.