Henry Hyde

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Madam Speaker, I want to respond to my friend from Florida that the language that substitutes for debate around here is troublesome. Demagogic, I heard the gentleman say. Immoral, gun-boat diplomacy, contempt for the U.N. None of those inflammatory terms, in my judgment, apply to this debate. And I suggest that we can disagree as to the one issue, and that is how to enforce the reforms we all agree are needed, without calling each other names or disparaging our motives.

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

Mr. HYDE. Well, reclaiming my time, Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman, but the Bush administration is on your side, not mine, this time.

Mr. HYDE

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 H.R. 2745.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to announce that I am terribly flattered by the extravagant things that have been said, but I must confess I did not name this bill after myself. While I deeply appreciate the honor, I am a trifle embarrassed, not thoroughly embarrassed, but a trifle. Mr. Chairman, most informed people agree that the U.N. is in desperate need of reform. Corruption is rampant, as evidenced by the ever-expanding Oil-for-Food scandal. U.N. peacekeepers have sexually abused children in Bosnia, the Congo, Sierra Leone and other places; and the culture of concealment makes rudimentary oversight virtually impossible. A casual attitude towards conflict-of-interest rules undermines trust in the U.N.'s basic governance. I could spend many hours reciting a litany of waste, fraud, and abuse that has become intolerable. So what do we do about it? What leverage do we have to bring about change in how this institution operates? First of all, we pay 22 percent of the budget. That is $440 million. We pay 27 percent of the peacekeeping budget. Do not ask me what that is. You cannot find out. That is a secret. China pays 2.1 percent, or $36.5 million. Russia pays 1.1 percent, or $19 million. Over the years, as we listened to the counsels for patience, the U.N.'s failings have grown worse, not lessened. Our many warnings, plans and urgings have largely come and gone, with few lasting accomplishments to mark their presence. Trust in gradual change has been interpreted as indifference, a very expensive indifference. So the time has finally come when we must in good conscience say ``enough.'' ``Enough'' to allowing odious regimes such as Cuba, Sudan and Zimbabwe to masquerade as arbiters of human rights. ``Enough'' to peacekeepers exploiting and abusing the people they were sent to protect. ``Enough'' to unkept promises and squandering the dreams of generations. Very few are opposed to the U.N.'s role in facilitating diplomacy, mediating disputes, monitoring the peace, and feeding the hungry. But we are opposed to the legendary bureaucratization, to political grandstanding, to billions of dollars spent on multitudes of programs with meager results, to the outright misappropriation of funds represented by the Oil-for-Food program. And we rightly bristle at the gratuitous anti-Americanism that has become ingrained over decades, even as our checks continue to be regularly cashed. No observer, be he a passionate supporter of this legislation or dismissive critic, can pretend that the current structure and operations of the U.N. represent an acceptable standard. Even the U.N. itself has acknowledged the need for extensive measures and, to its credit, has put forward a number of useful proposals for consideration. In the United States, the recognition of need for change is widely shared and bipartisan. Republican and Democratic administrations alike have long called for a more focused and accountable budget, one that reflects what should be the true priorities of the organization, shorn of duplicative, ineffective, and outdated programs. Members on both sides of the aisle in Congress agree that the time has come for far- reaching reform. I have heard no arguments in favor of maintaining the status quo. Even the opponents of this legislation concede the need for deep change. The key difference, the all-important difference, between their proposals and the one we have put forward lies in the methods to be used to accomplish that universally desired goal. We are already experiencing strenuous resistance to change from many sources, both within the U.N. and without. But admonishment will not transform sinners into saints; resolutions of disapproval will not be read; flexible deadlines and gentle proddings will be ignored. Instead, more persuasive measures are called for. This legislation brings to bear instruments of leverage sufficient to the task, the most important being tying the U.S. financial contribution to a series of readily understandable benchmarks. In an effort to derail this legislation, it has been proposed that we hand to the Secretary of State the power to selectively withhold funds from the U.N. as a means of inspiring a cooperative attitude in the organization. I certainly mean no disrespect for the current Secretary, whom I hold in the highest esteem, but the power of the purse belongs to Congress and is not delegable, no matter who holds that high office. We cannot escape this burden. The task we face is an extensive one, and I have no illusions regarding the difficulties and the challenges we face. But the choice is simple: we can either seek to accomplish concrete improvements, which will require an enforcement mechanism more credible and more decisive than mere wishes, or we can pretend to do so. For there can be no doubt that any proposal resting upon discretionary decisions concedes in advance that any reform will be fragmentary at best, if there is any at all. We are in a peculiar situation. Opponents of change cloak themselves in the robes of defenders of the U.N., when it is in fact they who would condemn it to irrelevance. Those of us who believe the U.N. can yet reclaim its mission and assume the role foreseen by the vision of its founders have no choice but to take up this task of U.N. reform. Yes, this is radical surgery. Sometimes it is the only way to save the patient. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to respond to my dear friend, and he is my dear friend. If I ever become President of the United States, I would nominate the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) as my Secretary of State and be guided by his advice.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, that is what I think of the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos). Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out that substantial compliance is accorded to the Secretary of State, so if 38 of the 39 are complied with, the 39th could have been substantially complied with and suffice. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining time to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt).

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

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. We, too, are very pleased to accept this excellent amendment and thank the gentleman from New York.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, on the evening of June 7, 2005, I was absent for several votes and regret missing them. Had I been present, I would have voted: Vote No. 228, Historical significance of Mexican holiday Cinco de Mayo, ``yea;'' Vote No. 229, Manifestation of anti-Semitism by UN member states, ``yea.''

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce today the ``Narco- Terrorism Enforcement Act of 2005.'' This legislation will provide yet another tool for our law enforcement agencies in the struggle against global terrorism and illicit drugs, and against those who traffick in the illicit narcotics which help finance terrorism. In a recent hearing before our International Relations Committee on the heroin crisis in Afghanistan, our excellent and knowledgeable Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) indicated that nearly half of the U.S. Government-designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) around the globe have links to illicit narcotics (18 of 40). The nexus between terrorism and illicit narcotics grows more and more as evidence emerges of their common, supportive links and as the use also increases of drug trafficking routes to move both narcotics and terrorists. In the case of the Afghan narcotics, which help finance several of the terrorist organizations that are today attacking American troops and the new Afghan democratic government, much of the heroin produced there is supplied to Europe and Asia, not to the United States. In cases where there is not yet any known nexus to U.S. trafficking or any domestic destinations here at home, our DEA agents on the front line often rely on another foreign transiting nation or the producing nation itself to bring indictments of these drug trafficking cases and proceed with difficult and challenging prosecutions. This bill makes clear that, even without direct U.S. nexus, if these drugs help support or sustain a foreign terrorist organization, the producers and traffickers can, and should be, prosecuted for material support of terrorism, whether or not the illicit narcotics are ever intended for, or enter, the United States. In addition, this bill raises the penalties under the material support-for-terrorism statute to reflect the seriousness of this offense. This bill reflects the new reality, emerging challenges, and ever-clearer drug links on the global terrorism front. I look forward to enacting this reform as Congress continues its effort to provide our national law enforcement agencies with the tools needed to win the war on global terrorism.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, the reason this vote is so important is simply because the embryo is human life. It is not animal, it is not vegetable, it is not mineral, but a tiny, microscopic beginning of a human life. Everyone in this room was an embryo at one time. I, myself, am a 192- month-old embryo. The question we face is how much respect is due to this tiny little microscopic human life. If we are truly pro-life, we should protect it rather than treat it as a thing to be experimented with. Lincoln asked a very haunting question at a small military cemetery in Pennsylvania. He asked whether a Nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal can long endure? And that question has to be answered by every generation. What is wrong with this legislation? The motives of its sponsors are so noble. Well, I will tell you two things that are fatally wrong with this legislation. The first one is, for the first time in our national history, taxpayers' dollars are going to be spent for the killing of innocent human life. That is number one. And number two, this bill tramples on the moral convictions of an awful lot of people who do not want their tax dollars going to be spent for killing innocent human life. Americans paid a terrible price for not recognizing the humanity of Dred Scott. We are going to pay a terrible price for not recognizing the humanity of these little embryos. We should not go down that road. In World War II, 1940, before America got in the war, there was a publication called the Yearbook of Obstetrics and Gynecology. And Dr. Joseph DeLee wrote in that yearbook something that applies to us today. Here is what he wrote. ``At the present time, when rivers of blood and tears of innocent men and women are flowing in most parts of the world, it seems almost silly to be contending over the right to life of an unknowable atom of human flesh in the uterus of a woman. ``No, it is not silly. On the contrary, it is of transcendent importance that there be in this chaotic world one high spot, however small, which is safe against the deluge of immorality and savagery that is sweeping over us. ``That we, in the medical profession, hold to the principle of the sacredness of human life and the rights of the individual, even though unborn, is proof that humanity is not yet lost.'' I believe humanity is not yet lost, and this vote will tell us the answer to that question.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Conference Agreement. I wish to commend the conferees for their work in bringing this important legislation to the House Floor. Not only does this bill provide critical support to our military and the war on terror, but it also funds international humanitarian reconstruction and economic assistance programs provided by the United States Agency for International Development. As my colleagues know, I have believed for many years that the HIV/ AIDS pandemic represents one of the greatest health and moral crises of our time, particularly in Africa. That is why I was especially pleased by the President's announcement of a visionary Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and have supported grants and other programs funded by USAID that help to reverse the spread of this pandemic. It is thus my strongly held view that USAID should continue to fund existing programs, as well as invest in new programs, that support the President's HIV/AIDS initiative. In this regard, there are two programs, both directed toward South Africa, that I believe deserve the Agency's particular attention. The first program is the new African Center for AIDS Management, which has, to date, trained over 800 graduates and is the largest program of its kind worldwide. I understand that USAID has provided only modest funding to support this initiative, while the bulk of the support has come from South African institutions. With substantial additional support from USAID during Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, this program could double in size and provide training for executives and senior managers from government, the provinces, municipalities and educational institutions, as well as NGOs, corporations, and trade unions, in the management of an expanded capability to detect and treat HIV/AIDS in Africa. The second program would be a new joint U.S.-South African program to provide telemedicine-equipped mobile clinics to serve the South African military involved in peacekeeping efforts throughout Africa. This program, which merits both USAID and DOD support, would be run through the South Africa Medical Research Council and provide medical services to remote areas to combat HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases. This mobile clinic system, employing some of the latest U.S. telemedicine technologies, would leverage U.S. military expertise across distances. As this system develops, so would it expand in both its capabilities and its services to the civilian population. Both of these programs are examples of humanitarian initiatives requiring modest investments that USAID is both equipped and funded to support. I applaud the Agency's past work in this area, and encourage both the continuation of existing efforts and the expansion of the new efforts that I have outlined.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to U.S. Air Force Captain James C. Cronin of Elk Grove Village, Illinois. Captain Cronin, serving as navigator, and eight other Air Force servicemembers were killed in the crash of a C-130 on March 31, 2005 during a night training mission in Albania. Captain Cronin was stationed at Royal Air Force Station Mildenhall, England with the 7th Special Operations Squadron of the 352nd Special Operations Group. Upon graduation from Elk Grove High School in 1991, he joined the Air Force, graduated from Officers Training School, and became a navigator. He rose to the rank of Captain in 1998, and during his career, he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for outstanding service to the United States. Captain James C. Cronin, was a young man of32 years when he made the ultimate sacrifice in the service of his country. Our deepest sympathies go to his beloved family, his mother Roxanne Galli, his father, James E.T. Cronin and his brother, Christopher T. Cronin, grandparents, and other family members and many friends. We honor the memory of U.S. Air Force Captain James. C. Cronin and the dedication and bravery with which he served our Nation.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, the question was asked, whose side are we on? I am on the side of the family. It seems to me the practice of ferreting some pregnant girl who is a minor out across the State line so that parents will not know about it is an assault on the family, and I do not know why the family should be assaulted as much as it is routinely by some elements. Where in the world is the humanity in killing an unborn child? I have listened to this whole debate, and not one syllable has emanated from the opposition to this bill about the real tragedy of abortion: the killing of an innocent human life. That is what abortion is. And you are busy attempting to facilitate abortions. The litany of medical societies that support abortion is a scandal. At one time, abortion was a crime. Now it is a constitutional right. But it is wrong, and the sad thing is, we have gotten used to it. This is a good bill and we ought to support it. Get on the side of the family.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, they say the sinew of our representative democracy is its citizens. We lost one of our model citizens--Mr. Scott Townsley Chase--on Easter Sunday, March 27, 2005. I have known the Chase family for several years, and I was saddened to hear of Scott's passing as a result of cancer at the young age of 46 years. He loved his family dearly and will be sorely missed by those he touched and impacted within the Elmhurst community. Upon graduation from York High School, Scott matriculated to Valparaiso University. After completing the requirements for a Bachelor of Science degree, Scott entered the Valparaiso Law School and graduated with a law degree in 1983. He was proud to be an attorney and thought it was the noblest profession a person could pursue. His family indicated that Scott liked solving people's problems and took pride in providing the best representation for all his clients. Scott was married to Michelle Chase--an attorney as well--and was the proud father of three wonderful children--Austin, Kelsey, and Morgan. Though Scott's family and friends will dearly miss him, they will always take solace in knowing that Scott has provided a foundation from which all can build upon while living life to the fullest.

Mr. HYDE

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his usual superb cooperation, and I wish to associate myself with his remarks in closing.

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

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

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 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 such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul). (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader.

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry). (Mr. FORTENBERRY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)