Tom Lantos

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Rangel-Lee amendment. I think it is a very constructive contribution to our global fight against AIDS, and I urge all of our colleagues to do so.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) for introducing this important amendment. The Iranian people continue to suffer under a theocratic, terror- supporting dictatorship. Those courageous enough to call for democratic change are regularly met by the regimes-supported security forces and vigilante groups. Just last month the Iranian government acknowledged they arrested some 4,000 peaceful demonstrators. What was their crime? They wanted freedom. This amendment affirms that the view of this body is that Iranians deserve real freedom, that they should not suffer because of their religious or political beliefs or because of their gender. The Sherman amendment supports Iranians' right to choose their own system of government, rather than having to endure the theocracy that has been forced upon them. Oppression in Iran is a humanitarian issue, but it is not only that. The existence of a dictatorial Iranian regime directly affects the security of the United States which now faces an enemy with a rigid ideology which it backs through an unlimited use of terrorism, and it may soon have nuclear weapons. Freedom in Iran is a nonpartisan issue. I strongly support this amendment and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in voting in favor of it.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of the Hyde en bloc amendments. This measure includes a number of critical amendments that were ruled in order by the Committee on Rules. They include initiatives in support of U.S. companies and U.S. workers obtaining procurement contracts from our foreign policy agencies, improvements in our visa processing system, tools to fight international child abduction, an important measure encouraging a greater role for the United Nations and for NATO in maintaining peace in Iraq, support for the women of Afghanistan, and an important plan to compel the agencies that use our diplomatic facilities to share the costs of building and protecting them. A number of our colleagues contributed to this important package, and I would like to recognize them. I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Maloney) for their important work; and I urge all of my colleagues to support the Hyde en bloc amendments. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. I strongly support his amendment. Mr. Chairman, it is outrageous that American businesses entering in good faith into commercial transactions in various countries should be subjected to provincial governmental abuse. This is not the government of India which is refusing to meet its obligation but a constituent state of India, Tamil Nadu. I think the gentleman is bringing an important matter before us, and I urge all of my colleagues to support him.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez). (Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me this time, and I rise in opposition to this amendment loosening satellite export controls. I am profoundly concerned, Mr. Chairman, that the language of the amendment would result in all satellite marketing information being exempted from any licensing requirement at all. Even if unclassified, some of the information transferred might well be sensitive. It is also possible that companies, without the government review of a license requirement, may unintentionally transfer more information than they should under the pressure of making a sale. The Departments of State and Defense would have no idea whatsoever what information is actually being transferred. The Congress needs more time and information to consider the full and serious ramifications of this change in satellite licensing regime in order to ensure that our national security is not compromised. I would urge the sponsors of this amendment, for whom I have a great deal of respect, to include at a future time a provision making clear that companies must first obtain a license to transfer marketing information. Short of that, I reluctantly oppose the amendment and ask all of my colleagues to vote against it.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

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

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the distinguished chairman of our committee for yielding me the time, and I want to identify my views with his and just add a few footnotes. The United Nations was founded at the end of the Second World War when the United States was economically not only a superpower but had a vastly disproportionate share of global gross domestic product. At that time, our contribution to the U.N. was 40 percent. It is now 22 percent; and I think a legitimate case can be made for multilaterally, through negotiation, adjusting our contributions to the U.N. as gross domestic products of the various countries change. But to take unilateral action at this stage, when the United Nations is so badly needed, despite all of its flaws, would be a singularly ill-advised move; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject this amendment.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee for yielding me time. I rise, Mr. Chairman, in the strongest possible opposition to the Paul amendment which would cause great harm to our national interests. Mr. Chairman, I do not look upon the United Nations through rose- colored spectacles. It is obvious that for every criticism my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), has of the United Nations, I could probably cite a half dozen. But the fact remains that many of the activities of the United Nations are clearly in the U.S. national interest. The International Atomic Agency monitors and exposes countries such as North Korea and Iran attempting to develop nuclear weapons. The World Health Organization works to prevent infectious diseases throughout the world, and it was critical recently in putting a stop to the spread of SARS. UNESCO, which the President wisely decided to rejoin, will provide us an opportunity to make our voice heard in the educational, cultural and scientific field of the international organization. UNICEF, the United Nations International Children's Fund, is providing invaluable assistance across the globe to millions of children in desperate need; and the U.N. itself, more often than not, is helpful in attaining our own foreign policy objectives. The absurdity of the United States, the one remaining superpower, the most powerful civilizing force on the face of this planet in the 21st century, withdrawing from the United Nations is nothing short of absurd; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject overwhelmingly this amendment.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I will not oppose this amendment at this time. However, there are a number of concerns with the amendment, including changing USAID's relationship to the Department of State. For example, current law provides that USAID is under the ``direct authority and foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State.'' The amendment has a different formula. Not sure how these two different responsibilities will be reconciled. Moreover, the amendment provides that USAID have certain responsibilities under the Foreign Assistance Act, but leaves out a number of important programs. These include assistance to promote human rights and democracy, protection and management of the environment, preservation of tropical forests, assistance for victims of torture, and assistance to victims of trafficking in persons. I think we need to carefully consider what other provisions of law are properly on this list. Finally, I am unclear how this provision relates to other parts of the legislation with respect to USAID's role in providing Millennium Challenge Assistance. Under the legislation before the House, USAID is on the Board of the new Corporation, must be consulted regarding Millennium Challenge Contracts, and plays a variety of other roles. Nothing is mentioned in this provision in this regard. I look forward to working with the Chairman of the Committee and the Gentleman from Arizona in working on this amendment as the legislative process moves forward.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, but I respect the dedication with which the gentleman from Arizona has advocated on behalf of development assistance generally and the Millennium Challenge Account particularly. His dedication to the less fortunate in the developing world is to be commended. It is in this spirit of goodwill and compassion for the people, the lower middle income countries, that I know the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) offers his amendment. Unfortunately, I am convinced that the gentleman's amendment will serve to deplete the very limited funds that are available for countries with the lowest per capita incomes and, by definition, countries which have fewer resources and less recourse to alternative financing. Moreover, the widespread poverty that often exists in the countries the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) is talking about is due to the vast income disparities which exist in many of these countries. The underlying cause of those disparities will not be solved by the Millennium Challenge Account but rather through a change of domestic policies in those countries, a reality which the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) addressed through his amendment in committee. I, therefore, regretfully must urge my colleagues not to support the Kolbe amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am fully aware of the gentleman's excellent amendment, and I support his efforts in enhancing our capability to provide post-conflict reconstruction assistance. The legislation of the gentleman addresses the importance of providing a coherent strategy in the provision of assistance to postconflict reconstruction in countries and regions. In today's world, we are continually faced with humanitarian disasters, wars and other crises, and enhancing our capability in providing reconstruction assistance in times of such crises is a vital and necessary goal that we must achieve. I want to commend my friend for proposing this very useful approach.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First, I want to commend my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), for the power and integrity of his convictions. The Millennium Challenge Account would not have been possible without his leadership and commitment to a bipartisan approach to international poverty reduction. The Millennium Challenge Account, as conceived by the President and crafted by the Committee on International Relations, marks the beginning of a revolution in U.S. international development assistance by recognizing the importance of democratic rule, good governance, and human rights. In achieving sustainable levels of economic growth and social development, the MCA creates the political and economic linkages critical to reducing poverty and to achieving progress. At the same time, the MCA removes the Cold War-era strategic calculus from the development assistance equation. Each potential recipient of our assistance is to be judged on its own merits, based on their commitment to progress and our commitment to the political, economic, social, and humanitarian value of development assistance. Finally, the MCA implicitly endorses a critical aspect of our approach to combatting international terrorism. Although the administration has not focused on this point, modern terrorism of the kind that struck our Nation on September 11 is fueled in part by the desperation and hopelessness that pervades much of the developing world. The MCA provides new hope, and as such, represents a powerful antidote to terrorism and other forms of violent conflict that have stalled the developing world. Mr. Chairman, when the Committee on International Relations held its first meeting on the MCA, I expressed a range of concerns about various aspects of the administration's initial proposal. I am pleased to say that the legislation included in this amendment has addressed satisfactorily each of my earlier concerns, and the Hyde-Lantos amendment before us has my very strong support. The administration's initial proposal relegated USAID, the most capable agency within our government in administering international assistance, to a bit part in managing this massive account. Our bipartisan amendment restores USAID to its rightful role by providing its administrator with a seat and a vote on the Millennium Challenge Corporation's board of directors. Together with the interagency coordination that our amendment requires, this improvement promises to strengthen the MCA considerably. Our bipartisan amendment also addresses my earlier concerns about the rigid application of strict eligibility criteria by mandating congressional and societal consultations on the finalization of criteria. By providing for an annual reevaluation process and by authorizing limited assistance to those countries on the cusp of eligibility, our legislation safeguards against the inherently arbitrary nature of mechanically selecting qualified states. Mr. Chairman, the Hyde-Lantos MCA amendment will not single handedly eradicate poverty, nor will it place the United States in the same company as Denmark, Norway, and the Netherlands, the global leaders in this field, in terms of per capita levels of development assistance; but our legislation will renew our commitment to poor, but striving, countries in our common fight against hunger and despair. Speaking as someone who as a youth experienced both tremendous deprivation and the bounty of American generosity, I can testify to the profound influence that U.S. assistance can have on shaping the perceptions of foreign nations of our great country. Mr. Chairman, allow me to conclude by addressing the reauthorization of the Peace Corps, which is also included in this amendment. It is fitting that we consider the Millennium Challenge Account and the Peace Corps jointly because both are critical to enhancing U.S. international development assistance. Since President Kennedy first deployed the Peace Corps in 1961, the program's 168,000 volunteers, men and women, young and old, have made an immeasurable contribution to reducing poverty and promoting American values literally all over the globe. Reauthorizing this inspirational initiative is clearly in our national interests and in the interests of reducing poverty and restoring hope across the globe. Two of our colleagues deserve special recognition for bringing the Peace Corps reauthorization before us. The gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), a new, but invaluable, member of our committee, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), a former Peace Corps volunteer himself, were instrumental in crafting this amendment; and I am deeply indebted to both of them. Mr. Chairman, today this Chamber has the opportunity to reauthorize the Peace Corps and to establish the Millennium Challenge Account. Both initiatives offer the best hope to defeat international poverty and international terrorism, and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support the Hyde-Lantos amendment.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), the distinguished ranking member of our Subcommittee on Africa. (Mr. PAYNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in strong opposition to the amendment. I am second to no one in this body in my criticism of China's horrendous human rights record, including its population control policies. But the U.N. funds program in China is specifically designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of voluntary family planning programs free of coercion and free of quotas. In fact, for over three decades the U.N. fund has helped couples in scores of countries around the globe, avoiding unwanted pregnancies through voluntary family planning programs that fully respect individual rights. Today, 99 percent of U.N. funds, and let me repeat, 99 percent of the funds are spent outside of China. But this amendment ignores 99 percent of the programs and cuts off our contribution solely over China. If this amendment should pass, more unwanted children will come into the world, and more unnecessary abortions will occur. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

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

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), my good friend and colleague and a former Peace Corps volunteer.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, yes, I do.