Jim Kolbe

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 358, which expresses support for the Government of Colombia. There were many in Colombia that criticized President Pastrana for making the peace process a priority above almost any other issue that faced the Colombian people, but none I think would criticize the commitment that he made to bringing peace to that troubled country. Now, rightly, in my opinion, he has called off the negotiations. He has moved troops into the demilitarized zone. He is facing a long struggle against a renewed urban terrorism campaign that is targeting the country's most important infrastructure assets. But we are proceeding as nothing has changed, as if Colombia is only fighting a counternarcotics war. I believe we have to face several realities and counter with a clear U.S. policy in response. The aggressive timetable that Plan Colombia was to follow, eradicating coca, providing alternative development, cannot be adhered to during a full scale war with the FARC and the paramilitaries. The alternative development plans were already failing from a lack of basic security for non-governmental organization workers and transport of alternative commodities, thereby putting the entire program at risk. It is true that Colombia is a source of 90 percent of the cocaine in the United States; but conversely, the United States is Colombia's largest trading partner of legal industries. As such, it is in the interest of the United States to promote better stability in Colombia by helping it to address these long-standing approximate and more recent escalations. I might remind my colleagues in the other body that of all the requests from the Government of Colombia, at the top of their list is the renewal of the Andean Trade Pact. Because it shares borders with five other countries, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, Panama, Venezuela, Colombia's instability is a threat to regional stability. While only 3 percent of U.S. oil consumed comes from Colombia, 14 percent comes from neighboring Venezuela. Oil imports from South America play a vital role in our strategy to diversify the sources of U.S. oil. The Colombian economy has faced a number of economic shocks that have limited its ability to contribute to Plan Colombia and the defense of its own people. Oil pipelines have been bombed, the price of oil has fallen, the price of coffee has fallen, foreign investment in Colombia has fallen. The internal shocks are only going to be made worse by the escalation of war. Colombians have traditionally shown a long-term tolerance for violence, but this is changing; and we can see evidence of this in the popularity of presidential candidates in Colombia that strongly support countering the FARC guerillas. The deteriorating economic conditions not only have threatened the Colombian Government's commitment to Plan Colombia, but the worsening unemployment only encourages the narcotics industry in Colombia. It has become a vicious cycle. I would urge my colleagues to recognize the changed situation in Colombia and that we must respond by clarifying U.S. policy. Let us begin an open debate about our role in Colombia and not rely on State Department lawyers to look for loopholes in current law. This resolution begins that debate, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the resolution.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time; and I do rise in support of H.R. 2234, the Tumacacori National Historical Park Boundary Revision Act of 2001. And in doing so, I want to pay special tribute to my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Pastor), whose idea and whose vision has brought this about and which I believe is making a very significant improvement to this important historical park. As has already been mentioned by earlier speakers, the legislation revises the boundary of this historical park, the Tumacacori National Historical Park, in southeastern Arizona, to include approximately 310 acres of land which are now adjacent to the park. The park includes three mission sites that were established by Jesuit Father Kino on the then-northern frontier of New Spain. And of course this area has a fascinating history of its relationship with Spain and the Jesuit missions. Father Kino established this mission in 1690, and the priests maintained a presence at the mission for over 150 years. However, when financial aid from Spain ceased with the Mexican independence in 1821, all native Spaniards were expelled from Mexico and Tumacacori's last resident Spanish priest was forced to leave. But the Mexican priests continued to maintain it, even as Apache raids increased. Then, in 1848, when the soldiers left the nearby town of Tubac, the residents of Tumacacori followed. A few years later, in 1853, Tubac and Tumacacori became part of the United States with the Gadsden Purchase that added it to the territory of New Mexico and Arizona. It was September 15, 1908, when President Theodore Roosevelt proclaimed this as a national monument and it was redesignated as a park in 1990. Tumacacori is just a few miles from the ranch where I grew up. People then and people now go to this historic park to tour the mission park and to go back and visit the late 17th and early 18th centuries. I remember as a schoolchild many visits to this wonderful place and the sense of history and culture that it brings to all of us that live there and to, I think, all the people of the United States. Today, we are recognizing the importance of this historic site both for what it was in the 17th century and what it will continue to be in the 21st century. I am very pleased to support this legislation and urge its adoption.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), another distinguished member of the subcommittee and chairman of one of the other subcommittees, and an individual who has contributed a great deal to the work of this committee.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), one of the other distinguished members of the subcommittee who has also made very valuable contributions to the work of this subcommittee.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), a member of the subcommittee who has done yeoman's work to help us get to this point. (Mr. KNOLLENBERG asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am privileged to bring before the House today the conference report on H.R. 2506, making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and related programs for fiscal year 2002. I want to also pay special thanks today to my very able ranking minority member, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). She has been a full partner throughout this process, and I am very grateful for the support and the participation that she has provided to bring this bipartisan bill before the House today as a conference report. It is important to note that this bill enjoyed widespread support when it came before the House the first time. We approved the bill on July 24 by a vote of 381 to 46, really unprecedented for a foreign operations bill. Senate passage occurred 3 months later, on October 24, by a vote of 96 to two. I think these votes in both the House and the Senate demonstrate the importance that most Members in both bodies attach to fulfilling our foreign obligations and assisting our friends and allies abroad. As I stated when I brought the bill to the floor earlier this year, I had three priorities for this legislation: first was to reverse the spread of infectious diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria; second, encouraging economic growth through open trade and transparent laws in other countries; and, third, improving the accountability of the agencies that are funded by this bill. This conference agreement represents important progress in all three areas. The conference agreement appropriates $15.346 billion in new discretionary budget authority. This figure represents an even split between the House and Senate allocations. It is $178 million above the House level, $178 million below the Senate-passed bill. Three major reasons for the increase are the needs to restore a portion of the administration's cut to the Export-Import Bank; to provide new funding for the Andean Counterdrug Initiative; and to intensify our efforts to combat HIV/AIDS and other communicable diseases. For the Export-Import Bank, we restored $138 million of the proposed reduction of $232 million in the program funds of the bank. This level of funding will allow for loan authorizations estimated at $10.6 billion, approximately $1.4 billion higher than the current level. Regarding the Andean Counterdrug Initiative, it is important to recall that a supplemental appropriation bill outside the boundaries of the subcommittee's fiscal year 2001 allocation funded the initial Plan Colombia adopted by Congress last year. Therefore, the $625 million the conference report recommends for these activities is significantly above the $154 million that was available in the regular 2001 appropriations act for these countries; hence, the requirement for more money for this initiative. I am disappointed that we could not provide a higher level for this important initiative. However, in the discussions that we had with the Senate on this matter, I often felt like I was a minority of one. We were able to provide the base funding of $625 million, plus transfer authority to provide $35 million in addition to these funds. That will allow for a total of $660 million for this program in fiscal year 2002. In addition, the conference report includes an amended version of the general provisions as proposed by the Senate that modifies the annual counternarcotics certification process. I ask that the letter I received from the State Department dated December 14, 2001, supporting the recommendation of the conferees be included in the Record. Over $2.8 billion of the funds provided in this conference report will be made available for military, economic, and refugee assistance for Israel. It is important that we pass this conference report as soon as possible, since Israel's economic assistance is a component of its fiscal year 2001 budget that expires at the end of December, this month, just a few days from now. Overall, the bill provides $5.14 billion for the Middle East, including assistance to Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon. Total funding for activities to combat HIV/AIDS in this bill is $475 million, a very significant increase over the level of $315 million provided in fiscal year 2001. Within that level, the conference agreement appropriates $50 million for the international HIV/AIDS trust fund, as well as general authority to provide for an additional $50 million, if warranted, from other sources in this bill and from prior year funds. Together with $100 million appropriated earlier this year in the supplemental appropriations act and $100 million appropriated in the Labor-HHS bill which we just completed on the floor a few moments ago, we have fully met and exceeded the President's request of $200 million in funding for the international fund to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. For bilateral assistance, no less than $395 million should be available for HIV/AIDS programs, assuming that $40 million is transferred to the proposed global fund. This amount exceeds the President's request by $66 million and the level authorized in law by $95 million. Some of the increase is for new programs in vulnerable countries such as Burma where little donor assistance is available to restrict the spread of AIDS. Overall, for assistance programs managed solely by the Agency for International Development, the committee recommends a total of over $3.5 billion, of which $1.43 billion is for child survival and health programs. These totals include $120 million for a grant to UNICEF. In addition, $150 million is provided for basic education, an increase of $47 million over the fiscal year 2001 level. Again, I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from New York for her persistence in ensuring that assistance for basic education receive a high priority in this year's conference agreement. Many children around the world have a great deal to be thankful to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for. For international financial institutions, the recommendation is $1.17 billion, which is $23 million over the 2001 level, but $40 million below the request. The bill also completes funding for the Heavily Indebted Poor Country Initiative, with a final $224 million, and provides an additional $25 million for the Tropical Forest Debt Relief Act; $5 million in new funds and $20 million from previous year balances. The President has called on the World Bank to dramatically increase the share of its funding for health and education in the poorest countries, but to do so with grants, rather than loans. Over the past few years, the committee has urged different administrations to adopt these policies, and I am pleased that President Bush has embraced them. The conference report also includes language similar to that included in the bill that the House passed earlier this year regarding compliance by the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian Liberation Organization with their commitments to halt violence and terrorism. Language in the conference agreement specifies the PLO and Palestinian Authority should abide by the cease-fire brokered by CIA Director George Tenet. If they are not in substantial compliance, the Secretary of State should impose at least one of three sanctions: First, the closure of the Palestinian information office in Washington; second, the designation of the PLO or one or more of its constituent groups as a terrorist organization; and, third, the cutting off of all except humanitarian aid to the West Bank and Gaza. The President is allowed to waive these restrictions if he determines it is in the national security interests of the United States. Many of my colleagues wanted to go further in sanctioning the Palestinians; others felt that any language might upset potential negotiations that are either underway or will be underway in the future. The conference compromise, I believe, is a good indication of Congressional intent. I think it sends the right message to the Palestinians: Comply with your commitments regarding the enunciation of terror and violence and no sanctions will be imposed. I also believe it gives the President and the Secretary of State additional leverage in their discussions with Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. The conference agreement also includes my proposal regarding the International Committee on the Red Cross. This otherwise noble institution has failed to admit the Magen David Adom Society of Israel to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The American Red Cross has courageously fought to get the Society admitted to the Red Cross Movement. They have withheld their dues to the Geneva headquarters of the International Red Cross for the past 2 years. I am proposing that the United States Government do the same, until the Society is fully able to participate in the activities of the International Red Cross. The bill also includes an additional $100 million to assist El Salvador in its recovery from two devastating earthquakes earlier this year. Many Members of the House are interested in assuring that additional assistance is provided for our friends in El Salvador, and the conference agreement provides that at least $100 million shall be made available for that purpose. The administrator of AID was in El Salvador last week and was able to make this announcement, and I can tell Members it was greeted with considerable satisfaction there. For the International Fund for Ireland, we are recommending $25 million. That is the same as last year, but it is $5 million above the President's request. The program is designed to support the peace process in Northern Ireland and the border counties of the Republic of Ireland. Again, this is a matter that has strong support in the House and that the Senate did not address. Our assistance program for Eastern Europe and the Balkans will receive $621 million in this conference report, an increase of $21 million over the fiscal year 2001 level. The major reason for the increase is the need to meet the last-minute requests of the administration for debt relief for Yugoslovia, which will assist the new democratic government of Serbia in its attempt to reform the economy of that country. For the states of the former Soviet Union, funding would decline only slightly, from $810 million to $784 million. The committee continues its support to find a peaceful settlement in the Southern Caucasus region by providing $90 million for both Armenia and Georgia. While the committee does not set aside a specific amount for Azerbaijan, it waives a statutory restriction on assistance to its government as it cooperates in the fight against global terrorism. The committee supports the struggle for a better life by the people of the Ukraine. Under this bill, the Ukraine will continue to receive $154 million, one of the largest single aid programs for any country on the globe. Assistance for South and Southeast Asia is a relatively small part of our bill, but its importance is far more substantial than the number would indicate. Ongoing economic growth in health programs in India, the Philippines, Bangladesh and Indonesia provide the framework for subsequent investment by the private sector and multilateral development banks. The United States will participate in the effort to rebuild the Afghan economy, but substantial funds for that purpose have not yet been requested by the President, and so they are not included in this conference agreement. For the second year, AID is encouraged to renew a basic education program in Pakistan. It is modest, but a very important start towards renewing a long-term economic assistance program in a country that has been seriously impacted by international terrorism. The conference agreement also provides funding for several smaller programs that often do not get a lot of attention, including $38 million for anti-terrorism assistance and $40 million for humanitarian demining programs around the world. The Peace Corps is another program that has made an enormous difference in the world over the last several decades, and it has very strong support in the House. We recognize its value and its importance by providing the full funding request of $275 million. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to, once again, thank our ranking minority member, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) for her cooperation in developing this year's bill and in reaching a conference agreement. We have had our disagreements from time to time, but we have approached them in the spirit of finding answers to them. We were both committed to developing a bipartisan bill that addresses the key priorities of the administration, as well as the Members of the House, both majority and minority, and, of course, the Senate in this conference report. It has been a great pleasure to work with the gentlewoman this year, and I am very grateful to have had her as my ranking member. Before we close, Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not say we could not be here today without the extraordinary help of the staff of this subcommittee and our personal staffs that make it possible. I am speaking of the clerk of our subcommittee, Charlie Flickner, our professional staff, John Shank, Alice Grant and Lori Maes. On the other side of the aisle, Mark Murray; and our personal staffs, Sean Mulvaney from my staff, and Beth Tritter from the staff of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). They have been extraordinary in their efforts to work together and to find the answers, and in making sure that this bill came to the floor in a timely fashion and was one that can have strong bipartisan support. Mr. Speaker, I thank all the members of the subcommittee for their invaluable assistance this year. I am proud that all the House conferees have signed this conference report, and I urge the entire House to vote in favor of this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record: Department of State, Washington, DC, December 14, 2001. Hon. Jim Koble, Chairman, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives. Dear Chairman Kolbe: This is in response to Mr. Mica's letter regarding proposed changes to the annual counter narcotics certification process. The general provision contained in the fiscal year 2002 Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations bill is a significant first step toward improving the current narcotics certification process. Moreover, it is important to remember that this provision to modify the certification process was negotiated, in good faith, by this Administration with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee under the leadership of then Chairman Helms. We understand that the general provision contained in the final version of your bill would be applied on a worldwide basis and would place a premium on cooperation rather than confrontation with other governments. That cooperation is essential for combating international drug trafficking and traffickers, as well as combating international terrorism and terrorists. Far from rendering meaningless the 15-year certification process or making it hard for us to fight illicit drugs and terrorism, the proposed legislation is a good measure of how far we have come since certifications began 15 years ago. At that time, we needed the blunt instrument of certification to get the attention of some governments. We are operating in a different world now, where the threat of international trafficking is better understood and where countries are more willing to work together to combat the problem. The provision in the 2002 Foreign Operations bill retains the positive elements of the current system by continuing to link the counternarcotics efforts of major illicit drug producing and drug-transit countries to their eligibility for most forms of U.S. assistance, while eliminating some of the aspects that have created tension in our bilateral relationships. This provision continues to require the President to evaluate major illicit drug producing or drug- transit countries in their efforts to adhere to the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. The 2002 counternarcotics provision further reduces one source of friction with many countries that are designated as major illicit drug producing or drug-transit countries by reducing the period countries must wait before they are eligible to receive the full amount of U.S. assistance in any fiscal year. The provision still retains the President's authority to waive the imposition of sanctions if he determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that it is vital to the national interests of the United States. Only countries that the President designates as having failed in their counter-narcotics efforts and who do not receive a waiver would be eligible for most U.S. assistance provided under the Foreign Operations. Appropriations Act in FY 2002. Additionally, the 2002 language preserves the Department's annual International, Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR), which is the single most important and complete survey anywhere of foreign drug control policies and practices. The modification to the annual drug certification procedures contained in the general provisions of your bill provides that the new procedures would remain in place for one year, allowing the Department to monitor their effectiveness and to consider other options for the longer range during this period. The Department is committed to combating the flow of illegal drugs into our country, particularly since the links between drug trafficking and international terrorism have been firmly established. We believe that the proposed modification to the current certification procedures will allow us to continue this important mission. Sincerely, Paul B. Kelly, Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19DE01.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19DE01.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH19DE01.003 Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the last speaker, I would like to make the following announcement for the leadership. Pursuant to the notice requirements of House Resolution 314, I announce that the following measures will be considered under suspension of the rules On Wednesday, December 19, 2001: H.R. 3487; H.R. 3504; and H. Con. Res. 292. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remaining time to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk). All the speakers that we have had on this side have been members of our subcommittee. To close this debate, I would like to call on an individual who has, over the years, contributed a great deal to establishing the foreign policy for this country through the work he has done here as a staff member, and today as a member of the Committee on Armed Services, contributes greatly to the national security of this country.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the full committee.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker), another member of the subcommittee.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support this conference report. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, I call up the conference report accompanying the bill (H.R. 2506) making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the notice requirements of House Resolution 314, I announce that the following measures will be considered under suspension of the rules on Wednesday, December 19, 2001: H.R. 2561 and H.R. 2751.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it shall be in order at any time on Wednesday, December 19, 2001, to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2506) making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes; that all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration are waived; and that the conference report shall be considered as read.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report accompanying the bill (H.R. 2506) making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. When I became chairman of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations of the Committee on Appropriations, I said that one of my highest priorities was to fund the battle against HIV/AIDS that is becoming a pandemic globally. With that in mind, I want to thank the distinguished chairman of the Committee on International Relations for his leadership and his interest in fighting HIV and other infectious diseases. We share this as a priority, and I am very pleased to work with the chairman on this important matter. The authorization for bilateral assistance through the United States Agency for International Development is virtually identical to the amount recommended by the House and Senate conferees on the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002. We hope to file that conference report on the bill in the very near future. We completed the work on our conference in November and are awaiting a signal from the leadership to file that agreement. Having said that, however, I think it is important to tell the House and Members here that the $750 million authorization that is included in this bill for the multilateral assistance is unlikely to be funded in fiscal year 2002. The chairman indicated in his own remarks that he understood that that was going to be the case. Members need to know, should know, that the multilateral fund does not yet exist. It is a concept, and we are working on it; but its structure, its objectives, its voting methodology has not yet been determined and is not likely to occur until the middle of next year. Despite that, the Committee on Appropriations is in the process of providing a total of $250 million in three separate bills for the proposed global fund to fight HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria; and that is an amount that is $50 million greater than had been requested in the President's budget. Now, more funds are possible; but I do not want anybody to have unrealistic expectations for the FY 2002 budget. First, it is very important that this fund get created and that we begin to demonstrate success. That is not going to happen yet until at least well into this fiscal year. Until the Congress concurs with the proposed terms and conditions under which our initial $250 million could be used, it is not prudent, in my view, to leave the impression that there is another $500 million available or required at this time for the global fund. Madam Speaker, I support this bill, because we must continue to dedicate an increasing amount of resources to fight the global pandemic of HIV/AIDS, but I do not want my support for the bill to be viewed as an endorsement of the $750 million level authorized for the proposed global fund, at least not at this time. We have more work to do before we are going to be ready to spend any of the funds set aside for the global trust fund, much less an amount as large as $250 million. I know the chairman understands that. So this is a proactive, leading-the-way authorization, and I appreciate that. I do think that we can carry out the policies and provide for the ongoing and expanded bilateral programs. I thank the chairman for his leadership.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of Trade Promotion Authority. Mr. Speaker, much has been made here today about how trade promotion authority can be a real shot in the arm for a struggling economy. Other members have pointed out how TPA is a critical tax cut for American consumers, workers, and companies. That, too, is true. However, I want to talk about 3 other reasons why TPA is so critical for America. First, TPA strengthens our national security. Capitalism, trade, and the rule of law support freedom. Freedom and stable economies support the growth of democracies. And democracies conduct peaceful commerce among themselves. TPA for President Bush is vital to bolster the global trading system. That system is critical to US national security. Second, TPA is critical if we are going to do more than spout rehtoric about helping the developing world. Each year we pass a foreign operations bill. While countries appreciate it, it is pennies on the dollar compared to the resources they need and compared to the benefits that might flow from a new round of trade liberalization. Open markets, capitalism, and foreign direct investment are the real tools they need--not foreign aid. And third, passing TPA is critical to US global leadership. We stand at a pivotal moment in world history. Our country fought two world wars, defeated the Soviet Empire in the Cold War, and adopted a foreign policy to spread democratic values, ideas, and beliefs around the world. We achieved much in the 20th century. We must not put that at risk in the 21st century. Secretary of State Colin Powell says Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) is ``an essential part of our diplomatic tool kit.'' He urges that we not allow our ``broader foreign policy agenda to be hijacked by the terrorists,'' and points out that ``trade helps create a secure international environment within which Americans can prosper.'' Trade promotion authority is critical for our national security, foreign policy, and US leadership abroad. Vote ``yes'' on H.R. 3005.

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule for Fast Track consideration of Trade Promotion Authority. Mr. Speaker, this is not about citrus, it is not about steel, it is not about food inspection or any other product or any other service. It is about whether or not we believe we should have enough confidence in the President of the United States to go on the world stage with other negotiators to implement the trade agenda that was launched at Doha. Now, in Doha where they set the agenda for the next round of talks, we got a set of negotiating issues that was extraordinarily favorable for the United States. It is everything that we could hope for in terms of what we want to accomplish in the next round of talks. Now we have to move to the next step. We cannot complete that unless the President has trade negotiating authority. We can never complete the talks, and yet, we are on a fast track with this round of talks. No organization, no country is going to put their best deals on the line if they think they are going to be changed by the United States Congress. Management and labor do not go into negotiations and then go back to their board of directors and their membership to amend the agreement; they submit it to them for a vote. That is what we are talking about doing here with Fast Track. It is not about whether or not we like the agreement, because we do not have an agreement. The opportunity to consider that will come later. One prominent Democrat from the Clinton administration, who would be known to every Member of this body, just 2 nights ago at a dinner told me that the framework legislation that is proposed here today goes much further than President Clinton or President Gore would ever have been able to offer. It goes a long way. It makes the environment and it makes labor rights principal negotiating objectives to support those. We need to have the confidence in our President to get this job done, and we do not compromise our ability to say yes or to say no to any agreement that is negotiated. With the crisis that we face in the world, this is not the time to say that our President should not be able to move forward to protect American interests abroad, American economic interests. Agree to this. Say yes to Trade Promotion Authority.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report and would like to congratulate the Chairman on resolving some difficult issues. One issue in particular is extremely important to me and the nation--the matter of allowing Mexican trucks into the United States as required by law. Again, this year, there was an attempt to prohibit Mexican trucks from operating beyond the border commercial zone. I have said all along that this is really an issue about certain protectionist interests trying to block Mexican trucks from the United States highways under the guise of truck safety. We all want to ensure that trucks traveling within the United States are safe. I believe, however, the most important aspect of truck safety is the observation of the driver and the inspection of the truck at the border and along the highway. This can be done while ensuring the security of our border and without establishing unattainable requirements with the sole purpose of denying the entry of Mexican trucks. Mexican trucks that can operate in the United States, in compliance with U.S. laws and safety regulations, should be allowed in--just like Canadian trucks. We must treat our neighbors to the south, Mexico, the same as we treat our neighbors to the north, Canada. Whether you agree with NAFTA or not, it is the law of the land and it is an international agreement that we must uphold. For too long the protectionist interests have thwarted efforts to implement the law of the land and to comply with our international agreements. How can we be a global leader by reneging on our agreements? We can't and we won't. The intent of the opponents of Mexican trucks entering the U.S. has been very clear all along. Let's face it, there are interest groups in the United States that do not want those trucks here. They are joined by interest groups in Mexico. It is time to build bridges to Mexico--bridges that allow trucks from the U.S. and Mexico to pass each other, not barriers that block the movement of ideas and goods. Although I do not think that this final compromise is perfect, I am a realist and am pleased that this conference report will allow Mexican trucks to enter all areas in the United States. We have made a step forward today toward treating our Mexican friends with the respect they deserve.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I thank him for his comments. I also wanted to commend him for his leadership in bringing this extraordinarily important piece of legislation to the floor at this time. I do stand here today because of my role as chairman of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs, understanding the interrelationship between our foreign policy and our economic policy. Offering the promise of greater trade with the United States to the Andean countries is a critical component of our foreign policy. The original ATPA was created to foster legitimate economic relations between the United States and the Andean region and to stimulate legitimate economic alternatives to narcotics production and trafficking in the Andean region. The ATPA has been successful in both counts. It has helped to foster trade between the U.S. and the Andean countries, and it has nearly doubled over the last decade the trade with that region to $18 billion, to the mutual benefit of U.S. and Andean businesses, and to consumers here in the United States. At one level, expanded trade is about consumerism. Lower tariffs means lower prices for the U.S. consumers, families, and businesses that import products from these countries. The interests of these consumers are vital. When we lower barriers to trade, we increase the quality of life for our citizens. But at another level, ATPA is about our national security policy at home and in this hemisphere. We are fighting a drug war here in the United States and abroad. This bill helps to generate economic growth in the Andean region. Such growth is needed to stabilize these democracies and empower their societies with the means to improve their quality of life. During consideration of our foreign operations bill, an overwhelming number of Members supported alternative development efforts by USAID and others. In the fight against drugs, ATPA is the best alternative development plan we have going. When I visited this region last spring to look at our Andean initiative, every single official that I talked with said the single most important help we could give to the region was to renew and expand the Andean trade Preference Act and allow them to trade. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, earlier today, I was on the House Floor but inadvertently failed to vote during passage of H. Con. Res. 257. Had I voted, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2506) making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 981.

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, often on this floor, I have spoken about our friends across our southern border. The country of Mexico is important because it shares a border, because it increasingly shares a culture with us and because it increasingly shares our commitment to democracy and freedom. On September 11, the U.S. was the object of a still-incredible attack by terrorists. And, on that very day, the Mexican Senate stopped its legislative work to adopt a resolution of sympathy and support for the United States. One week later, the government of Mexico released a statement which reiterated ``our solidarity with the people and government of the United States.'' Mr. Speaker, I thank the government and the people of Mexico for their concern and support. I attach these two statements, translated into English, for all our Members to read. Statement of the Mexican Senate, September 11, 2001 ``The Mexican Senate wishes to express to the Government of the United States of America as well as to all Nations, its most profound sympathy and deep indignation relative to the barbarous acts which today have offended the entire world. ``The Mexican Senate calls upon all men and women of good faith to prevent this tragedy from escalating into an interminable blood bath. ``Let us bring together the governments and peoples of the world to work together to guard against further harm; to scrupulously respect human rights throughout the world; and to build together a peaceful, dignified, and just world for all mankind.''

Mr. KOLBE

Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Boehlert-Kind amendment, but also to express my concern about the underlying bill. I was here on the floor in 1995 when we adopted the Freedom to Farm Act, and I thought it was a step in the right direction. This bill codifies a direction that we should not be going. The payments in here are for countercyclical commodity farmers, but it is $40 billion over 10 years. It goes a long way to reducing the farmer's market risk, and encourages farmers to grow without regard to market forces. What I am concerned about and want to express my concern about is what it does fundamentally to put us at risk with our international trade policy. It is a clear step backwards for U.S. trade when it comes to agriculture. It would increase farmer dependency on Uncle Sam; thus, it sends a signal to U.S. trading partners and developing worlds that we are not serious about our success in another round of global trade negotiations where we are arguing that we should get access to their markets with our commodities. The new language that would give authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to shift spending if U.S. subsidy commitments are exceeded, that is only an effort to abdicate political responsibility for what ought to be good policy in the first place. I think the Boehlert-Kind amendment at least moves us from spending more in what is called the ``amber box'' programs, those are programs that are trade distorting, to programs that are considered nontrade distorting, or ``the green box.'' It moves spending from those trade distorting programs into the conservation programs, and they are considered nondistorting; and, therefore, consistent with the trade agreements the Congress and the President have approved. In the development of farm policy, we have to lead by example. Passing this amendment will help remedy components of a fundamentally flawed bill, but we should recognize that it does not completely reverse the direction in U.S. trade policy that this legislation would have us take. I find some reassurance in the President's statement of administration policy. The Congress and the President should have the ability to help U.S. farmers, and I support the amendment and have expressed my concerns about the underlying bill.