Henry Hyde

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this is a fateful moment in our Nation's history and in the history of this Chamber. Once again, we have been awakened to the reality that we have mortal enemies. They do not desire compromise. They are not interested in negotiation. Our suffering does not give them human pause. Indeed, they celebrated. They do not seek our mere defeat. They are intent on our destruction. The demonic horror of these deliberate attacks remains inconceivable, but we have no choice except to accept that it is real nonetheless. Our enemies' message was stark and inescapable. They will make war on all of us wherever we exist for as long as we exist. The orchestrators would not have ordered these actions if they did not believe that they themselves would survive, that they would celebrate in triumph. I fear they have judged our failure to render justice for their past atrocities as weakness and as an invitation to even greater assaults. We must correct this misperception, not with words but with acts. No creed which revels in the slaughter of innocents can be included in the human community. No cause which aligns itself with evil can be allowed to exist among us. Toleration of such things not only invites our own destruction, it is a mortal sin. Those who hate us believe that a free people cannot defend themselves. They assure themselves that we will falter in the difficult task before us. Our self-proclaimed enemies will seize upon any weakness of resolve on our part. As long as they believe that there are divisions among us, as long as they expect our course of action to be indecisive and incomplete, they will have hope of success. We must deny them that hope. Our forefathers, who won our liberty, bequeathed it to us in the knowledge that to keep it we would have to prove ourselves worthy of it. They were confident that we would not shrink from the measures necessary to defend it. All who have gone before us, all who have given their lives for their country are witnesses to us here today. That is why I ask my colleagues to put aside our differences and move beyond rhetoric and now act. During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln reminded his countrymen of their responsibility with these words: ``We cannot escape history. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation.'' It is a profound thing that a free people go to war. That is why we, the Nation's elected representatives assemble in Congress, meet today, for we share with the President the responsibility for ensuring that our country is protected, that our people remain safe. Therefore, we as Members of Congress now have a duty to perform. We must grant the President the fullest authority to employ all of the resources of the United States, to make war on our enemy, to destroy their ability to harm us and to defend our beloved country. In an earlier hour of trial for our Nation, Julia Ward Howe was inspired to write the words that became known as the Battle Hymn of the Republic. We ask God once again to ``loose the faithful lightning of his terrible swift sword'' against the enemies of our country and of mankind. America has always triumphed over her enemies; and with God's help, we will do so again. 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 in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the legislation under consideration.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the learned gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), but would like to first congratulate the distinguished minority leader of this committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for his usual superb remarks.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 64) to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of our time to the distinguished majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence). (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson). (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin).

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, if adopted, the motion would seek to reimpose on the President the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution with regard to consultation with Congress and will impose new reporting requirements that go well beyond those contained in the War Powers Resolution. This is illogical because the whole point of the joint resolution we are considering this evening is to clear away legal underbrush that might otherwise interfere with the ability of our President to respond to the treacherous attack on our Nation that took place 3 days ago. Most importantly, we are stripping away the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution. It hardly makes sense to reimpose and, in one case, tighten the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution, if our larger purpose is to make it easier for the President to respond to terrorism. In any other case, I might understand and sympathize with the interest of the gentleman in keeping the President on a short leash as he goes about exercising the authority we give him tonight. But this is not any other case. This is a situation in which our Nation has been attacked by a sinister enemy, and thousands of our fellow citizens have been killed. I, for one, do not want to restrain our President as he goes about responding to this heinous attack. Many have compared the attack on Tuesday on our Nation to Pearl Harbor. After Pearl Harbor Congress declared war on Japan. We did not declare war subject to the requirement that President Roosevelt consult with Congress before sending our Armed Forces into action and periodically submit reports to Congress on how he was dealing with Japan. More Americans died on Tuesday than died at Pearl Harbor. Congress should not restrain the response of President Bush to this act of aggression any more than President Roosevelt was restrained in his conduct of World War II. I urge my colleagues to defeat the motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's motion to recommit the pending joint resolution. If adopted, the motion would seek to reimpose on the President the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution with regard to consultation with Congress, and will impose new reporting requirements that go well beyond those contained in the War Powers Resolution. This is illogical, because the whole point of the joint resolution we are considering this evening is to clear away legal underbrush that might otherwise interfere with the ability of our President to respond to the treacherous attack on our nation that took place three days ago. Most importantly, we are stripping away the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution. It hardly makes sense to reimpose--and in one case tighten--the restrictions of the War Powers Resolution if our larger objective is to make it easier for the President to respond to terrorism. In any other case I might understand and sympathize with the gentleman's interest in keeping the President on a short leash as he goes about exercising the authority we give him tonight. But this is not any other case; this is a situation in which our nation has been attacked by a sinister enemy and thousands of our fellow citizens have been killed. I for one do not want to restrain our President as he goes about responding to this heinous attack. Many have compared Tuesday's attack on our nation to Pearl Harbor, After Pearl Harbor, Congress declared war on Japan. We did not declare war subject to the requirement that President Roosevelt consult with Congress before sending our armed forces into action, and periodically submit reports to Congress on how he was dealing with Japan. More Americans died on Tuesday than died at Pearl Harbor. Congress should not restrain President Bush's response to this act of aggression any more than President Roosevelt was restrained in his conduct of World War II. I urge my colleagues to defeat the motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, it most emphatically does.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

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

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the distinguished vice chairman of the House Committee on International Relations.

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

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane).

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 matter on the legislation under consideration.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Six decades ago, Sir Winston Churchill wrote words that are just as salient today as they were then: ``Civilization will not last,'' he wrote, ``freedom will not survive, peace will not be kept, unless a very large majority of mankind unite together to defend them.'' Mounting that defense requires leadership. Freedom will not be defended without leadership. Human decency will not be defended without leadership. America was attacked yesterday because of what she is and because of what she stands for. America must now take the lead in rallying the forces necessary to defeat terrorism throughout the world. It is a standard plot in science fiction. Humanity: fractious, divided, conflicted humanity, unites at last to face together the threat of an invasion from aliens. What happened yesterday was not the doing of aliens. It was not something that came from ``out there.'' It was something that came from below, from that corner of hell where the most wicked sentiments in the human heart fester. Is it possible to imagine that, confronted with evil of this magnitude humanity, or at least Churchill's very large majority of humanity, will unite to defeat the common enemy? We must hope so. But we must also act, for American leadership is essential in gathering the friends of civilization to the common defense. Let us be very clear, let the American people be very clear and, indeed, let the world be clear about what happened yesterday. This was not a ``tragedy'' in the strict sense of the word. A ``tragedy,'' as we remember from Greek drama, is something inevitable, a fate from which there is no escape. What happened on September 11, 2001, was no more a tragedy than what happened on December 7, 1941. And here is the full meaning of the analogy that so many have drawn to Pearl Harbor: what happened yesterday was a willful, deliberate act of aggression. Its purpose was destruction: to kill Americans in order to demoralize the American people, destabilize American democracy, and wreak havoc with the American economy. While we extend our love and sympathy to the thousands who did indeed experience wrenching personal tragedies yesterday, we must be clear about the meaning of these acts. These were acts of war against the United States of America, against the American people, and against the rights and freedoms for which America stands in the world. These were acts of demonic evil whose perpetrators have disqualified themselves from membership in the human race. Wars have been fought for many reasons in 5,000 years of recorded human history. Wars have been fought for territory, for ideology, for plunder, for conquest. This war in which we are now engaged, and this is war, not ``crime'' in the ordinary sense of the term, is a war for civilization itself. It is a war that pits the defenders of human rights, the defenders of democracy against those who hate America precisely because she is the preeminent symbol, the greatest contemporary embodiment of human rights and democracy. We were a target yesterday because of what we stand for, because of who we are. In defending ourselves, we are defending everyone in the world who believes in the rights of man, everyone who believes that democratic politics, not mass violence, is the way to conduct public affairs. Expressions of resolve are important today, as are expressions of sympathy and solidarity; but there must be more. It is imperative that we understand that we are in a war. It is imperative we take the steps necessary, in both terms of policy and funding, to make sure we win that war. In doing so, we defend ourselves and we defend the hope which touches hearts around the world that this new century will see the triumph of freedom and the vindication of the democratic idea in human affairs. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the distinguished former chairman of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois, Speaker of the House (Mr. Hastert).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority whip.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I strongly support H.R. 2833, the Viet Nam Human Rights Act. I want to congratulate the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the vice chairman of the House Committee on International Relations, and other cosponsors of this comprehensive human rights legislation. Later this afternoon, the House will consider a resolution to approve the U.S.-Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement. We are all hopeful that free trade will improve the lives of the Vietnamese people and that it will eventually create irresistible domestic pressure for human rights and democracy in Vietnam. In the meantime, however, the Vietnamese Government remains one of the most repressive regimes on Earth. Religious persecution, especially of Buddhists and of Evangelical Protestants, has taken a turn for the worse during the last year. Since February, the government has engaged in a brutal crackdown against members of the Montagnard ethnic minority groups who participated in peaceful demonstrations seeking the return of their traditional lands. I think it is important, therefore, that in expanding trade relations we avoid sending a message of approval or complacency about Hanoi's human rights record. This bill makes clear that progress towards freedom and democracy will continue to be a central theme of U.S. foreign policy toward Vietnam. It uses forms of leverage other than trade sanctions to promote this objective, such as conditions on nonhumanitarian foreign assistance, guarantees that U.S. educational and cultural exchange programs will be open to people who share our values, and serious efforts to overcome the jamming of Radio Free Asia. I urge a unanimous vote in favor of this important human rights legislation.