Tom Lantos

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Thank you for your courtesy.

Mr. LANTOS. There isn't a Member in this body who could not subscribe to this. This is not the time for an ugly and divisive debate. And with its rigidity and total unwillingness to listen to half of this body, the majority has chosen to give us an ugly and divisive debate.

Mr. LANTOS. I thank my friend for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in sorrow, not in anger, because this morning could be a morning of unity and celebration and congratulations. Yesterday in unprecedented numbers the people of Iraq rejected the threats and intimidation of the terrorists and chose a new permanent national Parliament, the first fully sovereign, elected democratic assembly in the history of Iraq. This should be cause for celebration for the Iraqi people, for our troops, the troops of our allies and the Iraqi security forces who bravely protected the Iraqi people who came out to vote. Unfortunately, the resolution before us does not do that, and that I deeply regret. Mr. Speaker, we all know that there is a spectrum of views on my side of the aisle on how to deal with the difficult situation in Iraq in the weeks and months ahead. Yesterday I was asked with a number of other Democrats to go to the White House. I sat next to the President as we talked about the possibility of building a united approach to this difficult dilemma. But the leadership, in a rigid, unbending, almost ruthless fashion, refused to take one single word of change or modification in their resolution. It was a take-it-or-leave-it proposal, which is inappropriate in a democratic legislative body where some of us have been attempting to operate in a bipartisan fashion. I introduced a resolution and asked the Rules Committee to make it in order. My resolution congratulates the Iraqi people on three democratic national elections, encourages all Americans to support the Iraqi people, and commends our troops and those of our allies and the Iraqi forces for protecting their people at election time. That is the resolution which should be before us today. We would get a unanimous vote, and we would send a message to our troops and to the whole world that Congress is united. Instead, by rigidly demanding total adherence to the Republican formula, there will be an ugly, divisive debate in this body this morning. This is not in our national interest. I wish to use the balance of my time to read the resolution that I believe ought to be before us, Mr. Speaker. The text of my resolution is as follows: H. Res. 613 Whereas the people of Iraq have consistently and courageously demonstrated their commitment to democracy by participating in three elections in 2005; Whereas on January 30, 2005, the people of Iraq participated in an election for a transitional national assembly; Whereas all segments of Iraqi society actively participated in the approval of a new Iraqi Constitution through a referendum held on October 15, 2005; Whereas reports indicate that the people of Iraq voted in unprecedented and overwhelming numbers in the most recent election, held on December 15, 2005, for a new, national parliament that will serve in accordance with the recently- approved Iraqi Constitution for a four-year term and that represents the first fully sovereign, elected democratic assembly in the history of Iraq; Whereas this remarkable level of participation by the people of Iraq in the face of dire threats to their very lives has won the admiration of the world; Whereas the Iraqi elections could not have been conducted without the courage and dedication of the members of the United States Armed Forces and the armed forces of other nations in Iraq, including the members of the security forces of Iraq; and Whereas the December 15, 2005, election in Iraq inspires confidence that a robust, pluralistic democracy that will bring stability to Iraqi society is emerging: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives-- (1) congratulates the people of Iraq on the three national elections conducted in Iraq in 2005; (2) encourages all Americans to express support for the people of Iraq in their efforts to achieve a free, open, and democratic society; and (3) expresses its thanks and admiration to the members of the United States Armed Forces and the armed forces of other nations in Iraq, including the members of the security forces of Iraq, whose heroism permitted the Iraqi people to vote safely.

Mr. LANTOS. I would like to comment on your observation.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson). (Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones). (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver). (Mr. OLVER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price). (Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson). (Ms. WATSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin). (Ms. BALDWIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today could have been a day to rejoice and to celebrate in unity. Yesterday, the people of Iraq asserted their newly won rights, won, it must be said, at a steep cost; and they inspired us all by flocking to the polls at great risk to their lives. This was a peaceful process, an affirmation of all that has been sacrificed in nearly 3 years of valiant struggle. We should be rejoicing, Mr. Speaker. But it is a sad day, indeed, when the Iraqi people have to teach the United States Congress a lesson in democracy. The majority leadership in this body and in the Rules Committee that acts as its legislative gatekeeper have used authoritarian tactics to bring before us the resolution that we now debate. They have eliminated any real opportunity for nearly half the Members of the House of Representatives to effect the language of this measure, a measure deliberately calculated to be divisive. Mr. Speaker, look around at this people's House. It was not designed to be an echo chamber. We are not here merely to recycle the administration's rhetoric on Iraq. It is clear that there is a spectrum of views on my side of the aisle on how to deal with the difficult situation in Iraq in the weeks and months ahead. Why should the majority try to force the issue, politicize the war effort and polarize this body further? This resolution came to us yesterday afternoon. We tried negotiating in good faith and that went nowhere, so last night I introduced an alternative resolution and asked the Rules Committee to make it in order. My resolution congratulates the Iraqi people on three democratic national elections this year; it encourages all Americans to support the Iraqi people; and commends and congratulates our troops and those of our allies and the Iraqi forces protecting their people at election time. The Democratic leader, Ms. Pelosi, and the Democratic whip, Mr. Hoyer, joined me in advocating this measure. Mr. Speaker, that is the resolution which should have come before us today. It is a measure that would have won the unanimous support of this body, or nearly so, and would have sent a message of support to the Iraqi people, to our troops, and to the whole world. But the leadership of this body has approached this entire important matter in a rigid, unbending, and authoritarian fashion. Theirs was a take-it-or-leave-it proposal, not a comma to be changed; and that approach is inappropriate in a democratic legislative body where some of us have been attempting so hard to operate in a bipartisan fashion. Mr. Speaker, along with several of my Democratic colleagues, I was hosted by the President at the White House 2 days ago. The President said he wanted to explore a bipartisan approach on Iraq. Unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have not gotten that message. Instead, they have made a mockery of it. The election in Iraq yesterday was truly inspiring. It fills me with hope that Iraq can indeed emerge as a stable, pluralistic, and democratic society. This resolution could have been considerably improved, had there been a process of bipartisan consultation. We could have sent a united and strong message to our troops, to the Iraqi people, and to the global audience. But whatever my thoughts on the substance of the measure, I profoundly reject the arrogant and undemocratic process that produced it, and for this reason I shall vote ``present'' on this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler). (Mr. NADLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson- Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers). (Mr. CONYERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez). (Mr. GUTIERREZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey). (Mr. HINCHEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown). (Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Democratic leader.

Mr. LANTOS. I will use the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker, to read the resolution which was disallowed by the Republican leadership, a resolution congratulating the people of Iraq on three national elections conducted in Iraq in 2005. Whereas the people of Iraq have consistently and courageously demonstrated their commitment to democracy by participating in three elections in 2005; Whereas on January 30, 2005, the people of Iraq participated in an election for a transitional national assembly; Whereas Iraqi society participated in the approval of a new Iraqi constitution through a referendum held on October 15, 2005; Whereas reports indicate that the people of Iraq voted in unprecedented and overwhelming numbers in the most recent election, held on December 15, 2005, yesterday, for a new national parliament that will serve in accordance with the Iraqi constitution for a 4-year term and that represents the first fully sovereign elected democratic assembly in the history of Iraq; Whereas this remarkable level of participation by the people of Iraq in the face of dire threats to their very lives has won the admiration of the world; Whereas the Iraqi elections could not have been conducted without the courage and dedication of the members of the United States Armed Forces and the armed forces of other nations in Iraq, including the members of the security forces of Iraq; Whereas the December 15, 2005, election in Iraq inspires confidence that a robust pluralistic democracy that will bring stability to Iraqi society is emerging: Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the House of Representatives congratulates the people of Iraq on three national elections conducted in Iraq in 2005; encourages all Americans to express support for the people of Iraq in their efforts to achieve a free, open, and democratic society; and expresses its thanks and admiration to the members of the United States Armed Forces and the armed forces of other nations in Iraq, including the members of the security forces of Iraq, whose heroism permitted the Iraqi people to vote safely. This is the resolution that would have received unanimous approval by this body. Instead, we had an ugly, divisive, and unnecessary debate. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Texas (Mr. Edwards).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, once again, this House is considering a measure that will demonstrate leadership in the fight to end the heinous act of trafficking in human beings, another manifestation of the dark side of globalization that has locked thousands of women, children and men into sexual and labor bondage. This fight has not been without its victories. Over the past 5 years, since our House first approved the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, thousands of victims of modern-day slavery have been freed; a number of countries have adopted new comprehensive anti-trafficking legislation; and countries across the globe have woken up to the ravages of this heinous crime. The international community, Mr. Speaker, continues to ratchet up the pressure on the traffickers, as more and more countries join the International Protocol Against Trafficking negotiated at the United Nations, with the United States ratifying this critical document earlier this month after bipartisan urging by our International Relations Committee. While we can be proud of what we have accomplished so far on a bipartisan basis, it remains the tragic truth that the problem of trafficking in persons continues to be a human rights violation of extraordinary magnitude. According to our Department of Justice, 600,000 to 800,000 human beings are sent across national borders every year in a state of near or actual slavery, with 15,000 to 20,000 coming to our own shores. Mr. Speaker, we must continue to keep the pressure on our own government and all governments to address this severe human rights violation. I want to commend my distinguished colleague from New Jersey (Chris Smith) for his extraordinary and persistent work on this most important legislation. He is the hero of this bill and deserves unlimited praise. The bill provides for increased focus on labor trafficking; it launches an initiative in the critical area of child soldiers; establishes new programs for Federal-State partnerships in the area of trafficking here in our own country; and provides for robust funding of U.S. anti- trafficking programs. Mr. Speaker, let me just say a word about Federal-State cooperation in the area of anti-trafficking legislation. Our 2000 Act has spurred efforts by State and local governments to take responsibility for doing their part to combat this scourge. For example, in California, the State legislature recently adopted legislation supported by Assemblywoman Sally Lieber and State Senator Sheila Kuehl, with key support from San Francisco's outstanding District Attorney Kamala Harris, that creates a new State felony for trafficking and provides extensive protections to trafficking victims that are unique in the United States. Mr. Speaker, California's leadership on this has been critical. We need to understand that those who are subject to trafficking are not criminals but are victims subject to one of the most devastating practices that leave them in a permanent state of shock. Some of them will never be able to testify against their accusers, and we should not expect them to do so. I think we must recognize that, here in the United States, this devastating human rights abuse can only be contained and then eradicated with the help of local enforcement and social service agencies which have the contacts in the community to identify trafficking victims and criminal rings. Earlier this year, using many local contacts in our community, San Francisco District Attorney Harris was able to break up a trafficking ring with roots in the Bay area, arresting 27 suspects and freeing over 100 innocent victims. We need to empower more Kamala Harrises, and for this reason, I fully support the provisions of our legislation that provides support to State authorities to bring them into the alliance to eliminate trafficking. It is the only way we will make real progress in combating this scourge. Mr. Speaker, I include at this point for the Record a more fulsome explanation of the California law. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the actions of three California leaders who have shown great vision, dedication and care in their advocacy for victims of human trafficking by passing through the State legislature and into law the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act, also known as Assembly Bill 22. The sons and daughters of the great State of California owe a great debt of gratitude to Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, State Senator Sheila Kuehl, and San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris for shepherding through the passage of AB22 earlier this year. The bill provides an essential remedy to an ongoing human tragedy. Human trafficking is effectively modern-day slavery. It is the forced movement of innocent people against their will for the purpose of extracting labor from them, usually in the most degrading of duties. Victims of this crime against humanity are often coerced into becoming workers in the sex trade or in sweatshops. Also, forced domestic and agricultural servitude reflect areas where abuse is rampant. The extent of the human trafficking epidemic is shocking. The State Department estimates that globally well over half a million people, most of them women, are traded in such a manner as if they were mere property every year. However, the problem is not solely a concern for those who conduct the foreign policy of our Nation; there is a notable domestic component to the issue as well. A recent report by the Human Rights Center at my alma mater, the University of California at Berkeley, identified 57 different forced-labor operations in the State of California alone during the period between 1998 and 2003, and its authors estimate that at any given time there are more than 10,000 such victims in our country working under the threat of violence. This is the remarkable tragedy that the proponents of AB22 have sought so rightfully to address. The most basic function of the bill is to designate a special crime in the State penal code for the category of human trafficking. Whereas the Federal Government passed the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act in the year 2000, that bill only allows for courts to punish traffickers once they have crossed State lines. While the existing State law used to bind prosecutors' hands by forcing them to charge these disgusting crimes under various indirect categories such as kidnapping or false imprisonment, the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act creates a special State crime that is punishable with a minimum of 3 years in jail and directs State law enforcement to make human trafficking cases an organizational priority along with combating drug trafficking and gang activities. The act positions California to be a national leader on this issue. Although in recent months a number of other States have passed laws designed to close the human trafficking loophole in their penal codes at the urging of the Department of Justice--including Minnesota, Missouri, Arizona, and Texas--California has passed a far more comprehensive bill that surpasses Federal guidelines by providing victims of human trafficking with fuller protections under the law. The California Trafficking Victims Protection Act establishes a victim-caseworker privilege to coax survivors of this brutal crime to seek justice. The bill allows victims to bring civil cases against their captors, and it includes asset-forfeiture provisions to cut into traffickers' profits and take some of the financial incentives out of this black-market phenomenon. The bill also provides for a State- appointed task force to coordinate efforts among nonprofits, law enforcement, and victims' groups to fight human trafficking on a grassroots level. The bill's author, State Assemblywoman Sally Lieber of Mountain View, CA, has been committed to fighting human trafficking ever since as a city official she was involved in the breakup of a $6 million trafficking ring that forced Chinese women to work at illicit massage parlors in a form of indentured servitude. Assemblywoman Lieber deserves special commendation for her admirable devotion to the fight against human trafficking, as does State Senator Sheila Kuehl, who helped push the bill through the State's upper legislative body. Senator Kuehl played an especially important role in advancing the provision for the antitrafficking task force, in my opinion one of the most commendable aspects of the new law. I would also like to thank San Francisco District Attorney Kamala D. Harris for her crucial involvement in this cause as well. Under her watch local law enforcement officials unearthed a human trafficking network with roots in the Bay Area, in the city of San Francisco alone arresting 27 suspects and rescuing over 100 victims, most of whom were women who had made their way from South Korea to America in search of opportunity and encountered captivity and enslavement instead. Ms. Harris also spearheaded a public-relations campaign to raise the profile of AB22, elucidating the need to revise our penal codes to better confront traffickers and winning the endorsement of the California District Attorneys Association for the bill. She properly characterized the issue as a matter of ``fundamental women's rights as well as human rights,'' issues that, as you know, are quite near and dear to my heart, and which I believe are fundamental American values. The legislation before us today holds out the hope of helping more States to follow California's lead, and to enhance prosecutions against trafficking rings. The legislation provides for a program to assist States with their trafficking investigations and prosecutions, providing critical Federal aid to assist the States efforts. We know that the State law enforcement authorities have the contacts in the community to ferret out these trafficking rings, as District Attorney Harris did in the Bay Area. By bringing Federal resources and expertise to bear, we can build on our specialized capacity to curb this scourge. Mr. Speaker, most victims of human trafficking--like the exploited South Korean women mentioned above to whom my heart goes out--come to America in search of a dream and instead find misery and denigration where hope had been before. As an immigrant to this great land myself, I know the promise of the American dream, and I know this hope they hold in their hearts. Mr. Speaker, I commend District Attorney Harris, Assemblywoman Lieber, and State Senator Kuehl for their heroic efforts to share that dream with those among us who truly are the most in need. Our Nation is better off thanks to them, and for that I extend to them the most heartfelt of thanks. Now let us give them the support they deserve and adopt H.R. 972. Before reserving my time, Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to David Abramowitz of my staff who did extraordinary work on this subject, as well as the staff people on the other side who my colleague (Mr. Smith) has mentioned. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.