Tom Lantos

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield the balance of our time to the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Skelton. General Leave

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee who serves with great distinction as vice chair of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non- Proliferation and Trade, Mr. David Scott of Georgia.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Ambassador Diane Watson of California.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to our distinguished colleague from Texas, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Green.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my friend and colleague from California (Mr. Costa).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to our last speaker, I want to express my disgust and outrage at this arrogance which we have just heard. The previous speaker assumes that there is a monopoly of virtue and wisdom on one side. That is not the case. We have listened to our colleagues on the other side with respect and attention, and that is exactly what we demand of every single Member on the Republican side. This was an appalling spectacle debasing what has thus far been a fine and noble debate. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the conscience of this House, my good friend from Georgia, Congressman John Lewis.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I call for the unconditional release of Israeli soldiers still held hostage by terrorists. Exactly one year ago today, Hezbollah terrorists entered territory that unambiguously belongs to Israel under international law, launching an assault into Israel's north that killed three soldiers on patrol, wounded two, and took two others hostage. The two hostages, Ehud ``Udi'' Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, were injured in the attack, and yet Hezbollah refuses to allow representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit them, a flagrant breach of international law and practice. They have also refused to give the hostages' families any indication that their loved ones are alive. This is particularly worrisome, because reports have surfaced suggesting Goldwasser and Regev could have been critically injured in the attack in which they were taken captive. Only seventeen days earlier, fundamentalist thugs launched a similar raid out of the Gaza Strip to take hostage another young Israeli soldier on patrol in Israel's south, Corporal Gilad Shalit. He has now been held hostage in Gaza for more than a year. Just two weeks ago a recording of him pleading for help was released on a Hamas website. In this recording, Shalit says that his health is deteriorating and he is in pressing need of long-term hospitalization. It should come as no surprise that his terrorist captors have failed to allow him adequate medical treatment. Mr. Speaker, Hezbollah and Hamas are clearly to blame for the outbreak of violence in the Middle East last summer. They committed acts of war by kidnapping Israeli soldiers who were conducting regular patrol missions on their own side of the border. And while last summer's war has receded somewhat into the past, the initial causes for the violence have not yet been addressed. Chief among these is the fact that these three Israeli hostages remain in captivity and that Hezbollah and Hamas remain committed to Israel's violent destruction. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which imposed a ceasefire on Israel's Lebanon front, emphasized, and I quote, ``the need to address the causes that have given rise to the current crisis, including the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers.'' Unfortunately, that condition remains totally unfulfilled. Mr. Speaker, this House has not been silent on the plight of these victims of terrorism. Shortly after Udi Goldwasser's young wife visited Congress at the start of this year and pleaded for our help, we swiftly passed H. Res. 107, which was sponsored by my good friend Congressman Gary Ackerman, the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. This bill called for the unconditional release of the three kidnapped soldiers and condemned the culpable terrorist groups for their despicable actions. The Senate passed a similar bill, which was introduced by Senator Hillary Clinton. Speaker Pelosi has played a particularly admirable role in the global effort to free these three men. When she met with Syrian President Assad in Damascus just this past April, she presented him with a replica of the three hostages' ``dog tags'' as a means of urging him to secure their release from these terrorist groups that Damascus has long hosted and supported. She also made crystal-clear to President Assad that under no circumstances could bilateral relations with the United States improve until Damascus showed its willingness to cease sponsoring terror. To commemorate the one year anniversary of the kidnapping of Goldwasser and Regev by Hezbollah, the United Jewish Communities recently organized a campaign to send copies of these dog tags to every member of Congress. I commend them for their admirable and thoughtful activism drawing attention to the ongoing plight of the three captives. Mr. Speaker, Israel is a steadfast ally of the United States, and it is on the frontline of the war against terrorism. Israeli soldiers face such threats every day, much like our own inspiring and steadfast soldiers who are currently serving in harm's way in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. It is incumbent upon us to give our ally in this fight our steadfast support in the face of such terrorist predations. Mr. Speaker, many of us have been active in efforts over the years to convince our friends in the EU to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist group. A very few EU states do so on a national basis, but the EU collectively continues to view Hezbollah strictly as a political party. This is an absurd anomaly, and I urge our EU friends and allies to reconsider this policy on this sad one-year anniversary. I know of no other ``political party'' in the world that kidnaps and holds hostages--a fairly remarkable innovation in democratic politics. (In contrast to its policy regarding Hezbollah, the EU does designate Hamas as a terrorist group. I am pleased by that, but the distinction between Hamas killers and Hezbollah killers is frankly lost on me.) Mr. Speaker, I have the following message for the terrorists who are holding the three Israeli soldiers: Release these innocent hostages, and do so without delay. Should you not, the civilized world--and certainly this body--will not remain silent.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I fully support H.R. 556, the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007. Greater oversight is needed regarding foreign investment in the United States, and I want to commend Chairman Frank and Mrs. Maloney for the work they have done in bringing about this legislation. The Committee on Foreign Affairs has significant jurisdictional interest in this legislation, and I was very pleased at the manner in which our committees have worked on H.R. 556 as it moved through the legislative process. Mr. Speaker, I want to call attention to two critical issues. First, the treatment that the United States provides to foreign investors is often not reciprocated to United States companies who wish to invest in foreign markets, which threatens bilateral investment relations. The procedures laid out in this bill for the interagency Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, or CFIUS, allow for a responsible and fair assessment of foreign direct investment into the United States. These procedures, however, stand in stark contrast to actions taken by some foreign governments, where expropriations of assets, often in the energy sector, have occurred arbitrarily, without justification, and without full and fair compensation for United States investors. Mr. Speaker, we must continue to seek to ensure that U.S. investors are treated fairly in foreign markets, especially when a transaction being evaluated by CFIUS is for a company whose primary place of business is in a country that does not allow foreign direct investment from the United States in the same business sector as that of the covered transaction. In this way, we can seek to ensure that foreign governments honor their commitments in international agreements and provide for a fair and friendly investment climate for United States companies. I am pleased that the gentlelady from New York agrees with me on this score and that the House reports accompanying H.R. 556 address this important issue. Second, the impact of foreign investments on national security must be considered when reviewing foreign investments into the United States. I am pleased that the Financial Services Committee recognizes the seriousness of how transactions reviewed by CFIUS can impact our national security. The Committee report on H.R. 556 makes clear that Congress expects the acquisitions of U.S. companies, including energy assets, by foreign governments or companies controlled by foreign governments, will be reviewed closely for their national security impact. I fully endorse this view and believe that the United States must remain vigilant in protecting our national security interests. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. I thank my colleague for yielding, and I want to speak very strongly to support her position. The nightmare that is unfolding in Gaza is in no small measure the responsibility of the Government of Egypt. Egypt has a huge military, and it boggles the mind to assume that the Egyptian military would not have been able to seal Gaza from the constant flow of drugs, weapons and persons being trafficked into Gaza had they attempted to do so. Now, we all understand that the prime culprit in Gaza is Hamas, the terrorist organization. A secondary culprit is the previous corrupt regime of Yasser Arafat, which led to the parliamentary victory of Hamas. But the Egyptian Government has a heavy responsibility for what is the present situation in Gaza. It is a terrorist-controlled area, weapons flowing in, drugs flowing in, trafficked persons flowing in. And to have the minimum of a certification by our Secretary of State that at the very least Egypt at long last has decided to control this very dangerous border is an extremely modest measure. I would have preferred far more severe measures in this regard, but I strongly support this measure.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to thank my good friend from Iowa for providing comic relief at this late hour of this debate. This carefully constructed, exquisitely constructed absurdity masquerading as an amendment, and on the west coast there are still children watching this program, and I hope they are watching it because this is a rare moment in the history of the Congress of the United States. There are 435 Members in this body, every single one of us elected by our constituents. The Speaker of the House, at the moment, happens to be the Representative from the Eighth District of California. Now, if the gentleman were to offer an amendment saying that 434 Members may travel to Cuba and Sudan and Iran and Syria, but the Representative from the Tenth District of Illinois or the Seventh District of Texas may not, he would be laughed out of court. But that is precisely what this so-called amendment purports to do. It says nothing about any other Member of the Congress of the United States. We are free to travel to Syria. We are free to travel to North Korea. But one of our colleagues, who happens to represent the Eighth District of California, may not. Now, San Francisco happens to have two Representatives; Ms. Pelosi, who represents the Eighth District, and I represent the Twelfth District. The absurdity that you pretend is an amendment allows the person representing a part of San Francisco to travel to North Korea, to travel to Syria, to travel to Sudan, but the person representing the other part of San Francisco may not. Now, I really don't think that this amendment can be taken seriously at its face value. There is a hidden message here. That hidden message is a low blow, a pathetically low blow, aimed at our most distinguished Speaker of this body. I was with the Speaker on her visit, not only to Syria, but to Lebanon and Saudi Arabia. She represented the United States with eloquence, dignity and distinction. It turns my stomach that this sickening partisan attempt to get at the Speaker's performance of her legitimate duties is presented here as an amendment. Let me, however, deal with the underlying issue. The underlying issue relates to travel to countries with which we disagree. May I point out, Mr. Chairman, that beginning in 1981, at the height of the Cold War, I was appointed chair of our Parliamentary Liaison to the European Parliament. It became obvious to me that most of our colleagues in 1981 had never traveled in the Soviet Union or behind the Iron Curtain. So, every year I took it upon myself to lead a congressional delegation to the Soviet Union and to all the Communist countries of the Soviet bloc. Many of my colleagues at that time had no passport. But as a result of year after year after year going to these Communist countries, many Members of this body became familiar with the circumstances. Their commitment of anti-Communism was enhanced, and their understanding of the Soviet Union and the Central and East European satellites became much clearer.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee. Mr. Chairman, the primitive, absurd, stupid notion that we should not allow Members of Congress to travel to countries with which we have disagreement is really beneath contempt. This know-nothingism has no place in this body. The discriminatory approach of allowing 434 Members of the House of Representatives to travel to the Sudan, to look at Darfur and the tragedy unfolding there, but not to allow the Speaker of the House of Representatives to see with her own eyes the genocide which is taking place in Darfur is not worthy of this body. I hope that my friend from Iowa will withdraw this pathetic absurdity masquerading as an amendment. It is not an amendment. It is a low blow at the distinguished Speaker of the House of Representatives. I hope that if the gentleman does not withdraw it, it will be overwhelmingly defeated. This body is a body of adult men and women who are prepared to go to Syria, Sudan, Cuba, North Korea, and, if the Iranians will let us in, to Iran. At this moment, the Ahmadinejad government does not offer visas to any Member of Congress. I have been attempting to go there for well over 10 years. I hope, one of these days, a group of us will go there. But the notion of proposing an ostrich policy aimed at the Speaker of the House of Representatives, that she may not go to Cuba, while scores of Republicans and Democrats go, while scores of Republicans and Democrats go to the Sudan and to Syria, is a cheap partisan blow. Days before we went to Syria, three Republican colleagues were in Syria, and I salute them; days after we went there, another Republican colleague went there.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 885) to support the establishment of an international regime for the assured supply of nuclear fuel for peaceful means and to authorize voluntary contributions to the International Atomic Energy Agency to support the establishment of an international nuclear fuel bank, as amended.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of our resolution, and I yield myself such time as I might consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a dramatic step forward in the epic struggle to contain the spread of nuclear arms around the globe. Our bill provides a safe, efficient and collaborative means of getting nuclear fuel to any country that pledges not to develop nuclear arms and delivers on that promise. It will help ensure stability and expose the subterfuge that we know Iran is perpetrating in order to further its nuclear weapons pursuit. We know full well, Mr. Speaker, that Tehran is actively pursuing a nuclear weapons program. But many are persuaded by Iran's argument that it needs access to a reliable nuclear fuel supply to meet its civilian power needs. Now, of course we know that Iran's argument is bogus, but Tehran has used the illusory threat of a global breakdown in the supply of nuclear reactor fuel to argue that it must have its own facilities to guarantee that its reactors are forever supplied with fuel. At the moment, Iran is going to have two of these reactors. We know that the Iranian pretext has been long recognized as a gap in the global nuclear non-proliferation regime. A state can exploit the non-proliferation treaty's recognition of its good standing to develop peaceful uses of the atom and acquire potentially dangerous technology such as uranium enrichment. It could then turn around and use the technology to support a nuclear weapons program. Our legislation, the International Nuclear Fuel for Peace and Nonproliferation Act, addresses this gap in the nuclear non- proliferation regime and removes Iran's pretext for its so-called peaceful enrichment plan. It does so by promoting the development of an international regime of assured supply of peaceful nuclear power fuel to countries in good standing on their nuclear non-proliferation commitments. Our legislation, Mr. Speaker, authorizes $50 million to support the establishment of an international nuclear fuel bank supervised by the International Atomic Energy Agency. This money will match the $50 million offered by Mr. Warren Buffett to the Sam Nunn Nuclear Threat Initiative. The Sam Nunn program support is crucial to the realization of this initiative, but so is the political will of countries around the globe capable of cooperating in such a regime. So after this bill's passage today, I intend to work with key nations to establish the international nuclear fuel bank. I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, that our Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, and our former distinguished colleague Senator Sam Nunn, who has perhaps done more to advance the cause of nuclear non- proliferation than anyone else, have fully embraced this bill, and the administration is on record supporting it. Ours is a broadly supported, bipartisan bill. It would not have come to fruition without the enthusiastic support of my good friend, the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, our colleague Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. It was approved by our committee unanimously, a rare phenomenon in this era of divisive partisanship. It is imperative that we keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of Iran and provide a source of peaceful nuclear fuel to all countries that are currently flirting with nuclear development programs. I, therefore, urge all of my colleagues to support this most important measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional requests for time, and we yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Madam Speaker, I would like to call the attention of my colleagues in the House to a recent article by the distinguished Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware. For the past 34 years that he has served in the Congress, Senator Biden has been a steadfast proponent of strong American policies to deal with nuclear non-proliferation. In a column published last week in the Wall Street Journal Senator Biden proposed an ``International Nuclear Library'' that would store the nuclear signatures of the stockpiles of nuclear materials of all participating nations. Such a program would allow not only the United States but all participating countries to know that if any nuclear materials were inappropriately used, it would be possible to identify with certainty just where the culprits found their nuclear materials--a very strong deterrence to misuse. Madam Speaker, Senator Biden's proposal would encourage more responsible behavior by countries with nuclear materials. It would provide a strong incentive for close monitoring of nuclear stockpiles. This plan would also give all participating countries a source for any radioactive materials that have entered or exited their borders. I welcome Senator Biden's excellent and progressive proposal. Madam Speaker, I ask that Senator Biden's article be placed in the Record, and I urge all of my colleagues to give it careful and thoughtful attention. [From the Wall Street Journal, June 4, 2007] CSI: Nukes (By Senator Joseph Biden) The most dangerous threat America faces is the possibility that one of the world's most extreme groups--like al Qaeda-- gets its hands on a nuclear bomb. Luckily, a would-be nuclear terrorist cannot make the ingredients for a modern-day Hiroshima by himself. Either a state will have to give or sell him a bomb or the nuclear material to make one, or the terrorist will have to steal the material. To bring deterrence into the 21st century and prevent an attack from ever occurring, the United States and other potential targets of nuclear terrorism must take advantage of nuclear terrorists' reliance on states. The U.S. has long deterred a nuclear attack by states, by clearly and credibly threatening devastating retaliation. Now is the time for a new type of deterrence: We must make clear in advance that we will hold accountable any country that contributes to a terrorist nuclear attack, whether by directly aiding would-be nuclear terrorists or willfully neglecting its responsibility to secure the nuclear weapons or weapons-usable nuclear material within its borders. Deterrence cannot rest on words alone. It must be backed up by capabilities. Before, we relied on being able to track incoming bombers or missiles to know who had attacked us. Today, because a nuclear bomb might be delivered in a rental van or a boat, the credibility of the new deterrence will rest on our scientific ability to examine the air and ground debris created by an attack to determine the source of the nuclear material. Building on work from the Cold War, the U.S. is a leader in this new science of nuclear forensics. Any country today that aids a would-be nuclear terrorist, through action or neglect, has to be concerned about getting caught. But we can and must do more to improve our ability in this area, and to make our ability to trace the source of a nuclear explosion widely known. We need more nuclear forensics research, more scientists to analyze nuclear samples, and an assured ability--using our own aircraft or those of cooperating states--to quickly collect nuclear debris from the site of any attack, in this country or around the world. While there is a lot the U.S. can do on its own to deter countries from helping nuclear terrorists, there is much more we can do through cooperation with other governments. In the aftermath of an attack--or much better, if terrorists are caught smuggling nuclear material before an attack-- scientists would want to compare the samples they collect against what is known about other countries' nuclear material, to figure out the samples' country of origin. To enable such work, the U.S. should take the lead in creating an international nuclear forensics library. The library could house actual samples of nuclear material contributed by participating countries, validated data about their material, or binding agreements to provide predetermined data in the immediate aftermath of an attack or smuggling incident. A library cannot guarantee that in the wake of an attack the world could assign blame to a country, but it could be a critical tool in narrowing an investigation and debunking wild rumors or allegations. Countries might hesitate to share their nuclear material, but the library could safeguard samples and identify their origin only if they matched smuggled material or nuclear debris. Any country that refused to contribute to a nuclear forensics library would risk condemnation or suspicion in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack. Working out arrangements--to ensure that samples and data stay in trusted hands and that countries cannot fake the samples or data they submit--won't be easy. That is all the more reason to build on existing data collections in Russia and Germany and work with other countries to craft such a world-wide nuclear forensics library. Four years ago, I proposed improving our nuclear forensics capabilities, but today funding for critical nuclear analysis by our National Laboratories remains dangerously low. Congress must give the labs the resources that they need--and that America's security demands. This new form of deterrence must add to, not replace, other efforts to prevent nuclear terrorism. We must devote far more dollars and people to working with Russia and other countries to secure and reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons and materials and to remove nuclear weapons-usable materials from as many sites as possible. The president must make this effort his or her personal priority. Deterrence based on strong nuclear forensics is a critical tool to help prevent nuclear terrorism. To prevent a nuclear 9/11, we must use every tool we have.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2446.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2446 and yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the Taliban is back, posing not only an insidious threat to the people of Afghanistan but to our Nation as well. We simply cannot allow a resurgence of the Taliban. If we do, al Qaeda will once again be able to use Afghanistan as a state-sponsored launching pad for terror. And so every schoolhouse door in Afghanistan is a threshold to stopping terrorism. Every new power line in Afghanistan is a frontline in the war on terror. Every farm in Afghanistan used for legitimate crops, instead of opium poppies, is fertile ground for peace. So we ought to look at funding Afghanistan as both good foreign policy and good domestic policy. Every dollar we invest now translates into lives and dollars we save in the future, both in Afghanistan and in the United States. Our initial efforts, Mr. Chairman, in Afghanistan must be redoubled. For that reason, it was my pleasure to join with the ranking Republican member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my good friend, Ileana Ros- Lehtinen of Florida, in introducing this crucial reauthorization bill, which clearly demonstrates our long-term, bipartisan commitment to Afghanistan. Our job in Afghanistan is not finished, not by a long shot. Yes, the Taliban was seemingly purged from that Nation in 2001 and a democratic government was established in its place, but we must not have a false sense of security. The effectiveness and very existence of the Karzai government is threatened as we meet here today. As we speak, the volatile southern part of Afghanistan is aflame with clashes between NATO coalition troops and the reorganized forces of the Taliban. Make no mistake: Afghanistan is a brush fire that could ignite easily into an all-out conflagration. Recently, Mr. Chairman, there has been an alarming return to the reign of terror against women in Afghanistan. Just today we learned of the slaying of a pioneering advocate of free speech, a courageous woman who owned a radio station near Kabul, shot to death in her home. This brutal attack shows how difficult the working environment has become for journalists, especially for journalists who are women. So the Afghans need our help as much as ever. The teetering situation there is an echo of the instability just after the United States and our allies invaded that country. Security for the people and stability of the government are paramount. Let me sketch, Mr. Chairman, the basic outline of our bipartisan legislation. The first title of the Lantos/Ros-Lehtinen bill provides much-needed financial aid for health care, energy development, programs for women and girls, assistance to combat corruption, and a crop substitution program to curtail the growing of poppy. Under this section of our bill, the administration will be required to certify whether any senior official in Afghanistan's provincial or local government is involved in the illegal narcotics trade and to take appropriate action. Our bill also requires the President to appoint a coordinator for our Afghanistan assistance programs, including counter-narcotics. We mandate accountability in the effort to eliminate narcotics corruption. Title II of our bill bolsters security and policing in Afghanistan, supporting the international security force beyond October, 2007, and further training the Afghans. It encourages greater participation from countries in the region, and it mandates the creation of special drug interdiction teams. We must recognize, Mr. Chairman, that security in Afghanistan is inextricably intertwined with the fight against the narcotics trade. Title III of our bill ensures greater planning and accountability for the future of the country, and it fosters regional coordination. A structured blueprint for 2008 will be required, with updates as necessary. Reporting and evaluation measures will be expanded and extended. These are all crucial provisions for meeting benchmarks and assessing progress so that Congress can perform the oversight that is important to our successful effort in a war-torn country. I want to repeat, Mr. Chairman, we will not let Afghanistan fail. The world is watching, and it wants to know whether we have the resolve to fight the terrorist forces threatening Afghanistan, whether we are ready to maintain the country's security and stability. Mr. Chairman, the Committee on Foreign Affairs approved our bipartisan legislation unanimously. I want to repeat this because it indicates the unanimous conviction of the Foreign Affairs Committee, reflecting the view of this body and the American people, that Afghanistan will be a successful endeavor. I want to express my appreciation for the support of not only the ranking member, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, but also the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, Mr. Ackerman and Mr. Pence. I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in strongly supporting this most important piece of legislation. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee, my good friend from Missouri, Ike Skelton.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to Congressman Adam Smith, the chairman of the Armed Services Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee and a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to my neighbor in California, a valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Ms. Lynn Woolsey.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I'm very pleased to yield 3 minutes to my good friend and distinguished colleague from New York, Mrs. Carolyn Maloney, chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to my good friend from Texas, a distinguished colleague, Sheila Jackson-Lee, chairwoman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Connecticut, Congressman Joe Courtney, distinguished member of the Committee on Education and Labor.