Nita Lowey

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson).

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this conference report; and I urge my colleagues to support it. I want to thank Chairman Kolbe and our colleagues in the Senate for working with me to craft what I believe represents a good bipartisan and bicameral compromise. This bill demonstrates the commitment of Congress to our Nation's foreign assistance programs and puts foreign assistance where it should be, alongside diplomacy and defense as a pillar of U.S. national security strategy. In light of our conference allocation, which cuts nearly $2 billion from the President's request, we have put together a very good bill. While I would have liked to see us maintain the Senate's level of funding for HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria, I am pleased that we have been able to increase funding by $125 million above the House level and $268 million above the President's request, including $450 million for the Global Fund. I am also pleased that the conference agreement provides $440 million for bilateral international family planning programs and $34 million for the UNFPA. I am disappointed, however, that we could not retain commonsense provisions passed by the Senate that would have repealed the global gag rule and modified the Kemp-Kasten restriction. These provisions would have helped our programs be more responsive to the need for family planning assistance around the world. I appreciate that the conference report includes increases over the request, the House-passed level and the fiscal year 2005 level for Development Assistance, including a $65 million increase in funding for basic education. Since Chairman Kolbe and I began working together, we have quadrupled funding for basic education, and I am delighted that the Senate agreed to include the House-passed level for this valuable priority. The agreement fully funds our commitments to Israel and other Middle Eastern countries and provides increases for programs designed to mitigate ongoing conflicts. I am pleased that we retained the Obey amendment earmarking assistance for democracy and education programs in Egypt. We must use every tool at our disposal to encourage the government of Egypt to make greater strides in reforming its political process, and I think this bill sends that message. I am greatly concerned about the impact of the October 6 earthquake on the people of Pakistan, and I think it important that we stand by Pakistan in this time of need. While this bill does not contain new funds for earthquake relief, I appreciate the inclusion of language in the Statement of Managers recognizing the need for additional funds and setting forth the expectation that some of the $600 million provided in this bill may be reprogrammed to meet relief and reconstruction needs. I do feel that the bill has a few shortcomings. One is the funding for the Global Environmental Facility. Since the GEF recently adopted the management and transparency reforms advocated by the United States, I do feel we should have done our part by fully funding the fiscal year 2006 request. However, I understand that budgetary constraints limited our contribution to $80 million, and I hope that we can strive for full funding in fiscal year 2007. I also regret that, while we fulfilled the administration's request for Sudan, the bill does not contain funding added by Senator Corzine on the Senate floor for the African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur. I hope that the administration will seek these funds at the earliest possible moment and any subsequent request for funding or reprogramming in this fiscal year. Finally, I am pleased that we were able to achieve compromise language placing restrictions on military assistance for Indonesia and paramilitary demobilization assistance for Colombia. While I would have preferred the more robust Senate language on these issues, I believe the compromises we have reached address the concerns of all interested parties. Finally, I want to thank again Chairman Kolbe for his hard work on this bill, his commitment on this bill. I really deeply appreciate the close working relationship which we have enjoyed throughout the years. It has really been a pleasure for me to work on these very important issues in this bill with him. I also want to thank the members of my subcommittee for their commitment to the issues that we worked so hard on included in this bill. I want to thank Chairman Lewis and Ranking Member Obey for their commitment and their cooperation in working on this bill and, of course, the staff. Chairman Kolbe has an outstanding staff. Betsy Phillips, Alice Hogans, Rodney Bent, Rob Blair, Lori Maes, and Sean Mulvaney have been wonderful partners in this process; and we will miss a few of them who are moving on. Good luck to them. Of course, our outstanding minority staff, it is always a pleasure for me to work with Nisha Desai and Beth Tritter. I thank them for their hard work as well. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the distinguished ranking member of the full Committee on Appropriations.

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

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I just want the gentleman to know I share the concerns of the chairman. I believe that we can have far greater impact in Colombia by investing in alternative livelihoods rather than forced eradication. Mr. Speaker, I would be very reluctant to see funding for demobilization programs come at the expense of any alternative development programs, and I look forward to working with the chairman to ensure that this just does not happen. I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for raising these concerns.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, this motion to instruct the conferees on the fiscal year 2006 foreign operations bill will ensure that the House is clearly on record to provide the highest possible funding level for HIV-AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria in 2006. The motion I offer today makes a simple point: Although other issues have overtaken the global AIDS pandemic as front-page news, the pandemic is still growing; and we still have a responsibility to face the challenges it presents head-on. I was very pleased, as always, to work with the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) to provide robust funding to fight the AIDS pandemic, both for the Office of Global AIDS coordinator at the State Department and for the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB, and malaria. With an allocation that was more than $2.5 billion below the President's request, we were able to provide full funding, and even a little bit more, for this key priority. Fortunately, the Senate had even a higher allocation with which to work, and I am pleased that the Senate-passed bill significantly increased funding over the President's request for HIV-AIDS, including $500 million for the Global Fund, the premier multilateral mechanism for fighting AIDS and other infectious diseases. As we approach conference on the fiscal year 2006 foreign operations appropriations bill, we must maintain our resolve to fund the fight against the global AIDS pandemic at the highest possible levels. When the fiscal year 2006 bill finally passes, Congress will have provided more than $10 billion to fight AIDS since 2003. Our assistance has saved millions of lives, offered hope for a better future to those already infected with HIV, bolstered the institutional capacity of developing countries to deal with serious public health challenges, and offered comfort and safety to children orphaned by AIDS. We have done so much. Still, the United Nations estimates indicate that $15 billion will be needed in the upcoming year to fight the pandemic, a need that dwarfs the approximately $6.1 billion available. While some have benefited from our largess and that of the international community, many millions more are being left behind. Just yesterday, we saw reports of staggering statistics about the effect of the AIDS pandemic on children. Only one in 20 of the HIV- infected children worldwide who need life-prolonging drugs gets them. Only one out of 100 gets a cheap antibiotic that can save nearly half of the death rate from secondary infections like diarrhea and malaria. Fewer than one in 10 mothers infected with the HIV virus are given drugs that can stop transmission to their babies. And every minute of every day a child dies of an AIDS-related illness. The facts speak for themselves. We can and must do better. I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

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

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

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 66, which I introduced with my friend and colleague from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) to highlight the goals of the sixth annual ``Lights on Afterschool!'' celebration. This event, organized by the Afterschool Alliance and sponsored by the J.C. Penney Afterschool Fund is the only national celebration of after-school programs and the important role they play in the lives of children, families, and communities. On October 20, more than 1 million Americans, representing thousands of after-school initiatives across the country, including 166 programs in my home State of New York, are expected to open their doors to parents, neighbors, business leaders, and elected officials to showcase their accomplishments. In my own district, events will take place in New Rochelle, Mamaroneck, Ossining, and Yonkers, and more programs are registering every day. In spite of the growing enthusiasm for this year's ``Lights On!'' celebration, we do need more than just one day a year to highlight the importance of after-school programs. That is why I joined with other representatives, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), and I thank also my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers), who I did not mention before for supporting this program, as well as the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey). We formed the bipartisan Congressional After- School Caucus earlier this year. Our mission is simple: Build support for these programs within Congress and to translate that support into sufficient funding to meet the growing demand for after-school initiatives. For years, we have known that what our kids do after school can have as great an impact as what they do in school. In 1996, from my seat on the Committee on Appropriations, I helped create the 21st Century Community Learning Centers, the first ever Federal after-school initiative. Since then, we have watched it grow from a $1 million demonstration project to a $1 billion permanent program today because there is astonishing demand and tremendous unmet need for it. In fact, according to a study conducted by the Afterschool Alliance, 40 percent of middle school children, the age when kids are most vulnerable to engaging in dangerous activities, are unsupervised for a good portion of the day. Parents need safe, structured environments where their kids can learn and play, make friends, and develop new interests, yet Congress is not doing what we should to ensure that our kids are safe and engaged while their parents are at work. The Congressional After-School Caucus and the ``Lights On!'' celebration will focus on changing that. We will share the lessons we have learned to make sure after-school does not become an after-thought in our Federal education priorities. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, join the Caucus, and fight tooth and nail for every dollar available so that kids and their parents have access to these desperately needed programs.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for organizing this Special Order and emphasizing over and over again how important this issue is. Frankly, Mr. Speaker, it amazes me that 4 years after September 11 we are still talking about gaps in our Nation's strategy to prepare for the unthinkable, another terrorist attack. And one of these glaring gaps is the inability of first responders to effectively communicate in an emergency situation. We witnessed this 10 years ago in Oklahoma City. It resurfaced in Columbine in 1999. The problem proved to be deadly on September 11. Of the 58 firefighters who escaped the north tower on the World Trade Center and gave oral histories to the Fire Department of New York, only three, three heard radio warnings that the north tower was in danger of collapse. People all over the city looked at it happening, but our firefighters who bravely responded did not get any kind of radio warning. We will never know how many of the firefighters who died that day while heroically rescuing thousands of workers would have been spared if they had effective interoperable communications equipment to receive the evacuation orders. In the wake of Katrina, reports from the gulf indicate that communications failures plagued our first responders once again. The lack of communication with State and local officials in New Orleans compounded FEMA's poor response. The New York Times reported that rescuers in helicopters could not talk to crews patrolling in boats, and National Guard commanders in Mississippi had to use runners to relay orders. In 2005? We are going back to the days of Paul Revere. They had to use runners. They could not communicate. Crews on the ground could not talk to one another to coordinate searches, slowing down the rescue effort. For years, as my good colleague just said, several of us have demanded that the administration take the necessary steps to facilitate adequate communication between first responders in the event of an emergency. These demands have gone largely unanswered. I have once again introduced legislation to require the Department of Homeland Security to create a comprehensive interoperability strategy and to authorize funding for first responders and government agencies to plan and purchase equipment. Despite consensus, I do not know anyone that disagrees that interoperability is a problem and that first responders do not have necessary resources. The bill has not even moved out of committee. The record of this majority and this administration is troubling in other ways, too. First responders also lack adequate radio spectrum for their radios to work. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), my good colleague, referenced that legislation. Legislation has been repeatedly introduced to solve this, but the majority will not let it advance. The Intelligence Reform Act that we passed last year stated the DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, must come up with a timeline for achieving interoperability by April of this year. Five months later, I have not seen the report. Has the gentleman seen the report? There is no report. Finally, in his fiscal year 2006 budget request, the President did propose to fund the Office of Interoperability and Compatibility within the Department of Homeland Security at $20.5 million, a 35 percent decrease from fiscal year 2005 levels, and far below the billions needed to meet this challenge. The President did not get briefed adequately when Katrina hit. When he was preparing the budget, he clearly was not briefed adequately. Eight years ago, let me repeat that again, 8 years ago, the final report of the Federal Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee concluded that, ``Unless immediate measures are taken to promote interoperability, public safety agencies will not be able to adequately discharge their obligation to protect life and property in a safe, efficient and cost-effective manner.'' Last week, the 9/11 Public Discourse Project found that minimal progress has been made to provide adequate radio spectrum for first responders, and Commissioner Kean has called the failed communications that slowed Katrina rescue efforts a ``national scandal.'' Now, forgive me if I sound impatient or even angry, but with nearly every major study and report on homeland security concluding that lack of interoperability remains one of the most serious issues facing first responders in this country, I simply cannot understand why this administration has done little more than pay lip service to this issue. Well, it is time to do more than talk the talk. We must do something now to ensure that in the event of an emergency, be it a natural disaster or a terrorist attack, our local police, firefighters, EMS workers, 911 dispatch operators, State police, National Guard, Coast Guard, FEMA, FBI and all other public safety agencies have the ability to communicate with one another. Hurricane Katrina is not a wake-up call that something needs to be done, it is a fire alarm. And I urge my colleagues to immediately adopt legislation to address this critical problem. Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) for organizing this Special Order. I do hope that the administration and some people in the leadership are listening. I am tired, and I know the gentleman is, I am impatient and I am angry. We have hearings in the Committee on Homeland Security. Members of the administration testify; they agree with us. We ask them, when are you going to send out requests for proposals; when are you going to seriously address this problem? We are going to do it; we are going to do it. Katrina came. Hundreds of people lost their lives, and we still do not have a definite plan in place to make sure that people can talk to each other and communicate with each other to save lives. So I thank the gentleman again.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Rabbi Amiel Wohl of New Rochelle for being honored with the 2005 Yitzhak Rabin Peacemaker Award. The Yitzhak Rabin Peacemaker Award is given annually to an individual who has sought to bring better understanding and harmonious relationships between various religious and ethnic groups. Rabbi Wohl has carried out this mission time and time again, including efforts to aid Christians suffering in Lebanon through his organization, People for Relief in Lebanon. Rabbi Wohl has been committed to inter-faith communication since his arrival at Temple Israel of New Rochelle in 1973. Almost immediately, he coordinated the Interreligious Council, which brought together Catholic, Protestant and Jewish houses of worship and religions organizations. He has also been instrumental in other groups dedicated to interfaith communication, including the Westchester Jewish Conference, which has sought to cross both denominational and municipal lines. Rabbi Wohl has exemplified the ideals we seek in individuals of faith. From creating the Coalition for Mutual Respect in 1979 to traveling as far as Sacramento, California, to participate in inter- faith efforts, Rabbi Wohl has worked tirelessly to sustain the dialogue necessary to address conflicts among the different faiths in our country. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Rabbi Amiel Wohl on his accomplishments and in congratulating him on receiving this award.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. I rise today in support of this legislation, a down payment toward fulfilling our obligation to help the citizens and cities ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. The tragedy of Katrina has exposed some difficult truths of American life. That the richest Nation on earth is just as vulnerable to the laws of nature as the poorest. That the have-nots are not only poorer than the haves--they are also less safe. The tragedy has also brought into sharp focus the debate about the role of government in citizens' lives. It has exposed the fallacy advanced by the leadership of this Congress and the administration that government is the problem, and it can't ever be the solution. I believe that government should work with the private sector to help people help themselves to achieve their goals. Government should be a partner in making the lives of Americans better. Unfortunately, too often, on the floor of this chamber, we've heard from Members who bemoan the size of the government and blast programs to help vulnerable populations, even as they tout legislation providing billions in Federal resources to the most powerful and connected companies and individuals in this country. They have been allowed to snip away at the web of structures put in place to help the American people. Katrina was the deluge that exposed what we have warned of all along--when you starve the government, it fails those who need it most. In times of crisis and in times of need, the people expect--and should expect--that their government will stand with them. American taxpayers deserve strong, competent leaders who jump into action, rather than ignore crisis and delay response. Who take responsibility, not rush to point fingers. Who understand that government is necessary and can be a force for good. Last week, the U.S. Government failed its people. This legislation is merely one step toward repairing this breach of basic trust, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, our first concern over the coming weeks must be assisting those who need to be rescued, who need essential supplies and medical attention, and who need temporary shelter to survive these difficult days. I am committed to helping provide that assistance and Congress was correct to pass this aid package today to ensure that immediate resources are available for those efforts. However, as the recovery continues and we begin the rebuilding process, we cannot forget about the problems that have plagued our response to the hurricane. It is not too soon to ask what went wrong so that we can avoid those missteps in the coming weeks and in future disasters. Early indications point to the fact that once again, our response teams have been hampered with the inability to effectively communicate with one another. In Oklahoma City in 1995, at Columbine in 1999, and then again in New York in 2001, our first responders were unable to communicate. The administration has done little to address this problem despite my efforts over the last four years. We must find out exactly how communications deteriorated as quickly as they did and put in place a real interoperability plan. In addition, there appears to be a massive disconnect between the information the government has issued on the aid effort and what individuals on the ground have experienced. We have to make sure that aid gets to those in need immediately--right now, too many still lack basic necessities and that is simply unacceptable. We have known that the levees in New Orleans could not withstand the most severe storms. Former Federal Emergency Management Agency Director James Lee Witt recently stated that in the 1990s, planning for a New Orleans nightmare scenario included the pre-deploying nearby of hospital ships and ships with pumps to remove water from the below-sea- level city. We have to ask--why was this not done? Was it incompetence, a lack of leadership or has the deployment of National Guard troops to Iraq slowed recovery efforts? We also need to ask if reorganizations of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) offer us the best protection against all hazards. Prior to the creation of DHS, FEMA was largely viewed as a very effective organization. Since it has been placed in DHS, FEMA's role in preparedness and response has changed. Does the current departmental organization offer the best model of response to any type of hazard, be it a natural disaster or man-made? These are difficult questions but they are necessary ones. In the coming weeks, I will push for answers even as I work with Members of the Homeland Security Committee to make sure that the current crisis is addressed and victims are given the assistance they still so desperately need.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlemen for their support. I thank them for accepting it. This is a very important amendment. I thank the chairman for his wisdom and for his comments. I am glad we were able to use this as a vehicle to get the job done. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney) and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control that time.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe there is a Member opposed.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this commonsense amendment would simply ensure that the areas in our country facing the greatest threat receive their fair share of homeland security funds. Recent worldwide attacks against areas with significant critical infrastructure are not wake-up calls, they are fire alarms. This amendment already has widespread support. The House voted for these same provisions by a vote of 409 to 10 just 10 months ago. I urge my colleagues to once again support these provisions. Let us take action tonight so that we can allocate our precious resources to those who need them the most. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3057, the fiscal year 2006 foreign operations appropriations bill, and I want to thank the chairman of our subcommittee, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his hard work in putting together this bill. The good working relationship we share is evident in the product we present to the House today. The President's fiscal year 2006 request, when compared with the subcommittee's 302(b) allocation, presented us with an array of difficult choices. Our allocation is a full $2.55 billion below the request level, and into this reduced allocation we had to fit increases in administration priorities, such as the Millennium Challenge Corporation and the President's emergency plan for AIDS relief. While I do believe that the bill reflects, for the most part, a bipartisan compromise on the distribution of resources, I feel that this allocation fails to meet our overall foreign policy and national security needs at a time when the world is facing greater instability due to disease, deprivation and conflict. The world's attention is focused on the upcoming G-8 Summit, in which wealthy nations will announce new commitments to achieve development progress. It is in this context that we must consider the bill before us today. We must ask if it is sufficient to lead the community of developed nations in creating a new compact for global development; if it will make the United States the standard bearer in a renewed effort to lift the least fortunate among us out of poverty; if it represents the commitment we must make to achieving the good governance and adequate financial resources to address the world's challenges. My colleagues, we did the best we could with what we had, and I commend the chairman for that, but it is not enough. We are missing an opportunity today to demonstrate that the United States understands not just the need but the urgency of beating back the AIDS pandemic, getting children in school, encouraging reformers and oppressive societies, an opportunity to show that we understand business as usual simply will not do the job and that we are willing to take dramatic steps to bring the rest of the world on board. This bill will do a great deal of good for a lot of people. It will address many of the challenges around the world that most directly affect U.S. national security, but it is not the bold statement that we all know it could be. Nevertheless, I generally agree with my chairman on the spending levels recommended within the reduced allocation. We worked closely together to ensure that in the face of these devastating cuts, we at least level-funded child survival and health and development assistance priorities. We provided an increase over the President's request for HIV/AIDS, doubling his request for the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and malaria. Although I wish we could have done more for the Global Fund, I believe we are doing the best we can with the resources we have. We provided $465 million for basic education. We continued the U.S. reconstruction program in Afghanistan, and we fully funded our commitments in the Middle East, a powerful statement at such a critical time in the peace process. The message we have sent with this bill is clear: In contrast with the President's request, Congress will not increase funding for MCC and PEPFAR on the backs of our core development accounts. I am pleased that we were also able to restore deep cuts the President requested in reproductive health programs. This bill provides $432 million of bilateral funding, the fiscal year 2005 House-passed level, and earmarks an additional $25 million in International Organizations and Program funds for the United Nations Population Fund. The bill further specifies that any funds for the UNFPA that cannot be spent should be transferred to USAID specifically for bilateral family planning programs, a provision we carried in the fiscal year 2004 bill as well. As I said, I am also pleased that this bill provides a total of $465 million for basic education, $65 million more than the fiscal year 2005 level. And, once again, we provide $15 million for a pilot program to eliminate school fees and, for the first time, require a GAO study on our education programs to ensure that we maximize the effectiveness of our aid dollars. This bill fully funds Israel's annual economic and military aid package, including early disbursal of these funds within 30 days of the bill's passage. It also includes language carried in previous years, placing conditions on U.S. support for any future Palestinian state. This year, the bill includes an additional provision requiring a GAO audit of the fiscal year 2006 West Bank and Gaza program, as well as a project-by-project plan from the State Department on how these funds are being spent. And it extends a reporting requirement included in the fiscal year 2005 supplemental on the Palestinians' progress in reforming their security services, dismantling terrorist groups, and ending incitement against Israel. I agree with the chairman that these provisions are critical to monitoring the results we achieve as well as the money we disburse. I am proud that the bill and report carry a number of provisions aimed at increasing the U.S. commitment to fighting gender-based violence around the world, including in areas with high HIV infection rates and in areas undergoing conflict and civil strife. I want to thank the chairman for including a provision requiring police, judicial, and military training programs funded in the bill to develop training curricula on how to prevent and deal with victims of gender- based violence. And I am pleased that we were able to increase funding for UNIFEM and the UNIFEM Trust Fund to a total of $5 million. I want to point out a few specific concerns, however, I have with the bill. First, it provides no funding to the Global Environmental Facility, GEF. The GEF is the largest single funder of projects to improve the global environment, and every dollar invested by the U.S. in the GEF leverages $14 from other sources. I do understand why the chairman has proposed this cut. The GEF has dragged its feet in implementing a performance-based allocation system. And while I agree with the chairman's desire to send a message that we are serious about reform, I do believe cutting funding is not the right way to accomplish this. I hope we will have the opportunity to restore funding to the GEF as this bill moves to the Senate and through conference. I am also concerned that the bill places no conditionality whatsoever on U.S. military assistance to Indonesia and international military education and training for Guatemala. For the first time since Indonesian military-backed militias laid waste to East Timor in the wake of its August 1999 independence referendum, we will provide FMF to Indonesia free of any conditions. And despite the Guatemalan government's noncompliance with military reform stipulated in the Peace Accords, we have removed IMET restrictions on that country as well. I regret that we were not able to fully fund the President's request for refugees and peacekeeping. The reduced allocation simply made it impossible. I am pleased that we were able to provide additional funding as part of the fiscal year 2005 supplemental, and I am optimistic we can increase funding for these accounts in conference. Let me also say that even though this bill provides no funding for Iraq reconstruction, I take seriously the role this committee plays in exercising oversight over this effort. Reports of wasted money and poor accounting for taxpayer funds are certainly alarming. Congress, and particularly this subcommittee, has a responsibility to ensure that these funds are used properly and efficiently, and the chairman and I will continue to make this a priority. Finally, I would like to point out that the Senate's allocation for foreign operations is a full $1.6 billion above the House. It is my hope that this allocation will enable us to significantly increase funding for a number of critical priorities in the final conference measure. I want to thank the chairman once again for being such a good partner in the process. I particularly want to thank him and wish him a very happy birthday from all of us. With few exceptions, I believe we have put together a good bill within the context of our difficult allocation. I appreciate the gentleman's help and the work of the staff, Nisha, Betsy, Alice, Rodney, Rob, Lori, Sean, and Beth, in bringing this bill to the floor and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. And I want to thank the gentleman for raising this issue today. I strongly support continued funding for programs to secure and destroy small arms and light weapons around the world, and I join my chairman in delightfully accepting the amendment.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I, too, rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. Strengthening democracy and promoting human rights are at the heart of our national security strategy. The President has made these ideals central components of U.S. foreign policy. The State Department's Human Rights and Democracy Fund focuses on the countries and regions of greatest strategic interest to the United States, supporting those who seek to bolster human rights and promote democracy in key areas of the world. Unfortunately, the administration's request cut funding by $9 million below FY 2005 levels. This was in part because the administration requested increased funding for democracy programs through the National Endowment for Democracy in the Science-State-Justice-Commerce bill. However, the House did not grant the requested increases for NED; and, in fact, the SSJC appropriations bill cut funding for NED below the FY 2005 enacted levels. I therefore am very pleased that the chairman will accept the gentleman's amendment so that we may ensure sufficient funding for democracy programs in the FY 2006 bill.