Gregory Meeks

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3890) to amend the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 to waive the requirement for annual renewal resolutions relating to import sanctions, impose import sanctions on Burmese gemstones, expand the number of individuals against whom the visa ban is applicable, expand the blocking of assets and other prohibited activities, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Thank you, Mr. Bachus. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Chairman, over the past few years, the Financial Services Committee has been working to strike the right balance between protecting home buyers without eliminating the viability of the subprime mortgage market. Under the leadership of Chairman Frank, I believe we have struck that balance in a bipartisan manner. This is why I wholeheartedly agree and wanted to be an original cosponsor of this legislation. Madam Chairman, one of the new requirements of this bill is that all mortgage originators must be licensed to serve the public. The purpose of this requirement is to have a depository of all mortgage originators and hopefully eliminate from the system those loan originators that take advantage of borrowers. I know in my district this has been a real problem. Along with the fingerprinting and the pulling of a credit report, mortgage originators must also participate in 20 hours of education in a program approved by the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry which is to be developed and maintained by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators. Madam Chairman, I am very supportive of this aspect of the legislation. But I am concerned that it leaves open an opportunity for a conflict of interest. The conflict would take place if the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System were to decide to offer the education requirement themselves. Currently, 34 States have mortgage education requirements for loan originators licensed in those respective States. This training is conducted by many small business providers who are approved to offer mortgage education by each State's regulating bodies. My amendment is quite simple. It does the following: A, to maintain the independence of the approval process, the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry shall not directly or indirectly offer educational courses for prelicensure or continuing education for mortgage originators. And, B, in approving courses under this act, the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing Systems and Registry shall apply reasonable standards in the review and approval of courses. Mr. Chairman, to make it simple, I used to be a judge. A judge cannot preside over a case in which he is the litigant. This amendment has been discussed with the Conference of State Bank Supervisors, and they do not object. I think it is a simple amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I just realized that yesterday on H.R. 3093, rollcall No. 1076, I voted ``aye.'' I meant to vote ``nay'' because as a Democrat, I would never do anything that would inflict harm upon my Hispanic brothers and sisters.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize and congratulate Miss Joi E. Sheffield and Miss Kimberly A. Woodard as they embark on a journey to improve the lives of young boys and girls in South Africa through education. Miss Sheffield and Miss Woodard are launching their first event, in partnership with The Silver Spring (Maryland) Chapter of the The Links, Incorporated, Shari Sheffield, The Perfect Glass LLC and TV One, by hosting a charity event this evening at the Verizon Center's concert featuring legendary recording artist Stevie Wonder. Proceeds from their event will benefit The Elias Motsoaledi Pre-Primary School in Soweto, South Africa in the Gauteng Province. The Elias Montsoaledi Pre-Primary School is a temporary school located in the informal settlement of Montsoaledi. The school was built in 2002 with donations from The Links, Incorporated. The Elias Montsoaledi Pre-Primary School is a private school that does not qualify for funding from the South African government and is reliant on private funding and donations for school tuition and fees, teacher's salary, books and supplies, and meals. In May 2007, Miss Sheffield and Miss Woodard traveled to South Africa as part of a Links, Incorporated-sponsored trip, where they visited The Elias Montsoaledi Pre-Primary School, among many others. Following that experience they walked away committed to working to improve the lives of the children they met in Soweto, South Africa. Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate Miss Sheffield and Miss Woodard on the work they are doing in support of those seeking educational excellence in South Africa, and I wish them well in their endeavors.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, it is with a sad heart that I address the House of Representatives this evening. My cousin, the Reverend Willie ``Billy'' Boulware, was born on August 4, 1938, to the late Roscoe Meeks and Thomasina Boulware. He passed just yesterday. Billy always knew he was loved. His growing years were strengthened by close knit families and communities. And so when it came time for him to go to high school, a place where many come into themselves, Billy was already poised to lead. He attended Emmett Scott High School where he briefly played football, but found a zone of his own when he joined the school band. It was there that he gained an increased level of education and friends worth fighting for. Reverend Boulware was a son of the South, and Billy knew of the inequities that existed but refused to allow the anger and disappointment that overtook some to become the fabric of his being. Instead, he clung to the lessons learned at home, the wonder of educating himself, the promise he saw in his friends, the people living lives of purpose, and of a love of life's journeys. Billy attended Friendship Junior College and later Benedict College, where he received his bachelor of arts degree, then Winthrop College, where he got his master's. Later he would gain a master of divinity and doctorate of divinity from Mid-Atlantic Seminary. A desire to learn and the warmth and smile that greeted everyone he met were Billy's hallmarks and trademarks. When you met Billy Boulware, you knew instantly there was nothing to fear. His welcoming spirit enveloped a room. Perhaps that's why he became a director of a Head Start program, an initiative that seeks to provide children good beginnings, or why he was chosen to direct an alternative high school in Rock Hill, a place where the young are sent in the hopes that they might be reshaped, redirected, and shown their promise. And ever the student, my cousin Billy was also an assistant principal at Castle Heights Middle School, demonstrating by example of his own life that it's not necessarily the position you are in, but the character that lives inside the person holding whatever position. Later Rev. Boulware held positions of commissioner of mental health, director of the York County Planning Commission, head of the Board of Elections for York County, hearing officer for the Rock Hill Hearing District, and a York County judge. Billy knew he couldn't guarantee things, but he knew he could play a part in the administration of justice. Time and again Billy chose to serve the people of his community. And all the while he maintained his interest in education sitting as a member of the board for Morris College. There was no question that Billy knew love both at home and through the Holy Spirit. So it was really a continuation of his life's journey when he assumed the pastoral duties at Mount Olive Baptist Church. His love of God and his desire to live a committed life, buttressed by the love of his wife, Barbara, his love and partner for 45 years, made it possible for him to pastor for those 35 years. Even as Billy Boulware made himself available to his church family, he chaired the Board of Trustees of Friendship College. He supported his wife's dreams and encouraged his son, Wendell, through his medical degree. He told his little girl, Dietra, that she was born to be more as he encouraged her dream of working in the financial services industry. And when his daily guidance was no longer required, he placed himself wherever his children asked that he be. Some might have viewed Billy as being saddled with much too much; but as I remember his ever-present smile, the enthusiasm you could hear in his voice, and the laughter that came from him when he spoke of a trip just taken with Barbara to visit his grandchildren or hearing him speak passionately of why grandparents matter in children's lives, I know Billy Boulware was ``saddled'' with nothing but the heart of love. Billy was a man among men. He was a giant to his Barbara, Wendell, and Dietra, and to the rest of his family as well. He cared for his uncles, his aunts, his cousins, and would do anything he could to ensure all thrived. Billy's presence made you smile, and his laughter made you warm. His sure-footedness made you steadier, and the pride he expressed in me called me to work deliberately and with greater purpose. This world has lost a great somebody in the being that was Billy Boulware. But there is no question in my mind that on October 29, 2007, the day Billy went home to his Father, there was great fanfare. He was greeted with the words, ``Well done my good and faithful servant, well done!'' The greatest part of Billy Boulware still lives in all the persons whose lives he changed, and all the lives they changed, and the greater sense of humanity that exists because Billy lived. Until we meet again, let this Congressional Record stand as testimony that Billy Boulware was a great and faithful servant of God. Billy didn't just up space, he made a way for some, and broadened the horizon for many many more!!!!

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have been a major advocate of making sure that America maintains its global competitive edge whether it is in business or human development. America must stay at the forefront of innovation, productivity and expertise. No matter how economically, militarily or culturally strong a Nation has become, it will certainly begin its decline when it rests on the laurels of its past accomplishments and ceases to stay ahead of the competition. H.R. 2868 was introduced by me and my good friend and colleague from New York, Vito Fossella, toward the goal of maintaining America's competitive business advantage. Although Mr. Fossella and I may be on opposite sides of the aisle, we stand in the same space when it comes to our support for American businesses and American markets. Recently, Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City and Senator Charles Schumer commissioned a study on ``Sustaining New York's and the U.S.'s Global Financial Services Leadership.'' In the executive summary of that study, it states, ``The U.S. financial markets, with New York at the center, are still the world's largest and are among the most important by many measures.'' The United States is home to more of the world's top financial services institutions than any other country. Six of the top 10 financial institutions by market capitalization are based in the New York area, and U.S.-based firms still head the global investment banking revenue rankings. In terms of global financial stock, the United States remains the largest market, well ahead of Europe, Japan and the rest of Asia, although the financial stock in other regions is now growing faster than it is here in the United States. The United States generates more revenues from financial services than any other region. But once again, the rest of the world is challenging that leadership in a hotly contested investment banking and sales and trading markets. To sum up that paragraph with a phrase that Satchel Paige is known for: ``Don't look back. Someone might be gaining on you.'' To further quote the study, the study says: ``The choice of venue for IPOs offers the most dramatic illustration of the interplay between these factors. The world's corporations no longer turn primarily to stock exchanges in the United States, such as the New York Stock Exchange or NASDAQ, to raise capital internationally.'' It continues to say: ``The IPO market offers other examples of jurisdictional arbitrage working against the United States, with very small-cap companies in the United States increasingly favoring London's Alternative Investment Market over NASDAQ,'' and I add here the American Stock Exchange. ``American private equity firms are choosing to list on European exchanges.'' Mr. Speaker, in this study, leading financial services executives who were interviewed indicated that ``the legal environment and regulatory framework in particular were critical to potential issuers considering whether to enter the U.S. markets.'' The implementation of Sarbanes- Oxley was part of the United States regulatory framework that was cited as a concern for issuers in considering the markets in which they would list. This is why earlier this year I introduced H.R. 1508, the COMPETE Act of 2007, to improve the implementation of section 404 of Sarbanes- Oxley. My office has worked closely with the PCAOB and the SEC to review and discuss the regulatory reforms of SOX. We hope it will improve the implementation of the law. Toward continuing my efforts to improve our regulatory environment, H.R. 2868 will make a technical change to the 1996 National Securities Market Improvement Act that would allow the American Stock Exchange and NASDAQ to offer a tier 2 level listing if they so choose. This would allow these exchanges to compete more directly with the London Alternative Investment Market and the Toronto Stock Exchange. It will help us keep our competitive advantage and lead. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank Chairman Frank for moving this bill through the committee. I would also like to give special thanks to my cosponsor, Mr. Fossella, for the work of his office, particularly Ryan McKee. I also want to thank Lawranne Stewart and Deborah Silberman of Mr. Frank's staff, and of course Mr. Jameel Johnson, my chief of staff. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2868) to eliminate the exemption from State regulation for certain securities designated by national securities exchanges, as amended.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, again, I would like to thank Mr. Fossella for all of his hard work, because that is what we are talking about. We are talking about basically the backbone of America has always been its small businesses. So when we have these firms, we want them to invest and grow their businesses right here in the United States of America. It makes great sense, because as they are investing and expanding their businesses, it creates jobs for Americans. When you look at the services, the financial services in particular, that is where the jobs are being created, that is where we are the most competitive, and that is where we have got to stay and keep our competitive edge. It makes great sense for us to make sure that tomorrow continues to be the great day for our financial services industry, because it is the key to the economic security, as well as to the jobs of tomorrow for many of our young people. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill. It makes great sense, and it helps us maintain the competitive edge and helps us maintain being the financial capital of the world.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the leadership of this House for bringing this resolution to the floor. I'm an individual who has great concerns about America's ability to maintain its global advantage economically in the years to come. Globalization is making the world a much smaller place. And although globalization has improved economic conditions in many parts of the world and has contributed greatly and mightily to the United States' prosperity, it also means that competition that was once domestic is now international. Young children today don't only have to compete with people of their town for work, now they compete with the people from their region. Businesses that once faced regional competition now face international competition. Not only can you now ship products all over the globe, but modern communications now allows you to contract professional services from anywhere in the world without needing a person and personal meetings. Capital now moves across the planet instantaneously at the push of a button. What does all this have to do with my resolution, Mr. Speaker, the Financial Services Diversity Initiative? It has to do with the fact one of America's leading industries where we have the global advantage is, in fact, financial services. As outlined in the resolution, financial services represents 7 percent of the total employment in the United States, and the industry is a key component of the U.S. trade surplus in services. The service sector is the largest and most dynamic force in the U.S. economy. Services account for over 80 percent of the United States' GDP and employment. Financial services is a key component of our dominance in services, along with express delivery, telecommunications, information technology, audiovisual, energy, transportation and professional services. In every single congressional district in the United States, the majority of the workforce is employed in the service sector. In no district is there fewer than 70 percent of the workforce employed in services, and in some districts that figure is as high as 92 percent. Moreover, the service sector is projected to account for virtually all new job growth in the United States over the next half decade. And States like New York, North Carolina, Florida and California that already have major financial services, financial services will be a major component of that growth. Despite current conditions, our long-term dominance in this area is not inevitable. As the McKenzie Report indicated, our lead in financial services is being challenged all over the globe, particularly by London. In that study, the executives surveyed stated that one of the key factors in choosing a location from which to operate was an available and skilled workforce. As a Member from New York, which is America's financial services capital, and a member of the Financial Services Committee, I have interacted and visited many financial services firms from the various sectors of this industry. I've been very supportive of the industry because it is of importance to America's competitive advantage and the financial health of my dear city, New York. However, the lack of diversity in the industry is glaring, particularly where African Americans and Latinos are concerned. Although women are more than 50 percent of the industry, their absence is much greater in the executive management and the boardrooms. In a 2006 study conducted by the GAO that was requested by the Financial Services Committee, firm officials that were surveyed acknowledged that despite having problems, they still faced challenges in recruiting and retaining minority candidates. According to the report, ``Some officials also said that gaining employees' buy-in to diversity programs was a challenge, particularly among middle managers who were often responsible for implementing key aspects of such programs.'' To bring the issue closer to home, in New York State, the Department of Labor statistics shows that financial activities account for approximately 460,000 jobs. African Americans and Latinos together make up 53 percent of New York City's population. The same source states that nearly 40 percent of blacks and 35 percent of Latinos are unemployed. This is not to say that the financial services industry is responsible for the unemployment, but the fact of the matter is that if you are not able to place your majority population in the majority industries of your city, you're going to have a serious unemployment problem. And let's face it, whatever industry you're talking about, your greatest resource is going to be human resources. In this resolution, I'm not asking for quotas or percentages, I'm asking for the government and the industry to take steps that are consistent with America's promise of fairness and opportunity toward increasing the diversity of the industry on all levels. Years ago, this Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, and banks found out that doing business with a more diverse client base was very profitable. I believe the entire industry will find the same is true with a more diverse workforce. I strongly encourage the Members of this House to pass this resolution, which simply says that we want the best opportunities for all Americans. Let me take a moment to thank Chairman Frank and Ranking Member Bachus for working in a bipartisan way in bringing this through the committee and to the floor. I also want to thank Jameel Johnson of my staff, Erika Jeffers and Jaime Lizarraga of Mr. Frank's staff, who happen to be two African Americans, one is a female and one is a Latino, showing how diversity works, and we are working together. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 140) recognizing the low presence of minorities in the financial services industry and minorities and women in upper level positions of management, and expressing the sense of the Congress that active measures should be taken to increase the demographic diversity of the financial services industry, as amended.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. I yield myself such time as I may consume simply to thank the gentlelady from Illinois for her support in working in a clearly bipartisan manner in this particular matter so that we can get our friends in the financial services to offer opportunities to men and women who happen to be minorities, and we can move on and share in this great population.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Services caucus, I wish to call the attention of members to an important statement on July 26, 2007 by Ambassador Peter Allgeier, U.S. Ambassador to the World Trade Organization, on the Doha Round of trade negotiations. Ambassador Allgeier spoke in the World Trade Organization's Trade Negotiations Committee. I wish especially to call attention to his remarks on Services, one of the three essential pillars of the Round. Members will remember that talks in Potsdam among the EU, India, Brazil, and the United States ``G-4'' ended on June 21, 2007 without making progress. Immediately WTO Director General Lamy refocused negotiations back in Geneva, and the Chairs of the Committee on Agriculture and NAMA were instructed to produce draft texts embodying what progress had been made in their respective sectors. These texts were tabled last week. No progress was made, however, in services, which accounts for 65 percent of the global economy and 20 percent of global trade. Ambassador Allgeier's statement is important for two reasons. First, he states that the United States believes that the agriculture and NAMA texts have ``advanced our collective work'' and that the United States is prepared to ``continue serious and concerted efforts in September to build on these texts.'' The second reason is that Ambassador Allgeier establishes that in addition to making more progress on the agriculture and NAMA pillars, ``we also must define what is necessary to achieve a level of ambition for services that is at least on par with the level of ambition'' for agriculture and NAMA. In other words, the United States is insisting that progress must be made in services for this Round to be considered a success. Madam Speaker, no Doha Round result will be adequate or defensible if it does not include substantial new market access for U.S. services exports. In 398 Congressional districts more that 70 percent of workers are employed in services. Every state exports services. The United States has a surplus of $73 billion on its services trade, and we can expect this to grow substantially--if the Doha Round can succeed in knocking down the substantial barriers to these exports in foreign markets. I ask unanimous consent that the text of Ambassador Allgeier's remarks be included in the Record. Statement by U.S. Ambassador Peter Allgeier at the Trade Negotiations Committee (July 26, 2007) Like others, I would like to thank Ambassadors Falconer and Stephenson for their extraordinarily hard work in producing draft texts. During the past two days we all have been providing our initial reactions--some of which, including our own, have been decidedly pointed and sometimes critical. But none of those reactions should be taken as diminishing the significance of the contributions by both chairs, and their dedication to helping us achieve the needed modalities. As a general matter, we would first underscore our commitment to work with both of the draft texts in September. While we have serious concern with some of the content in each of the draft texts, we nonetheless believe that they have advanced our collective work, and the United States is prepared to continue serious and concerted efforts in September to build on these texts. We also would note our strong agreement with Chairman Falconer that there should be no assumption that the ultimate solution to the issues will lie in simply landing on the mid- point of the various ranges that have been put forward. Indeed, given the lack of clarity in some areas of the texts, they are as much snapshots of the current situation as they are suggestions pointing to particular solutions. However, as we achieve greater clarity in these areas, it should help us to narrow our differences. In this context, both draft texts serve to underscore what the United States believes is a continuing fundamental--and still unmet--challenge of the Doha negotiations and key to achieving a successful outcome: namely, securing a strong market-opening outcome that will result in meaningful new economic opportunities and trade flows worldwide--in agriculture, industrial goods, and services. agriculture As we outlined earlier in the week, our fundamental concern with the Agriculture draft text--and with the state of play within the negotiations--is the uneven treatment across the three ``pillars'' in agriculture. While the domestic support and export competition pillars sections of the text are highly developed, many key topics in the market access pillar remain conceptual at best--with regard to both developed and developing country market access. Combined with this uneven treatment is a continued imbalance in ambition across the pillars. Ambition in agricultural market access must match ambition in domestic support. This assessment means that our first priority in September must be to fill in the gaps, on Special Products, Special Safeguard Mechanism, Sensitive Product treatment, tariff caps, and other critical elements. On domestic support, the text calls for large reductions in U.S. Overall Trade Distorting Support. For those who have called for ``effective cuts,'' it is important to note that U.S. OTDS levels would have exceeded the upper bound of the range in the Chair's paper in 5 of the past 8 years. And we would underscore that, while we have indicated that we are prepared to offer more on OTDS, our ability to make further cuts depends upon securing significant real increases in market access. We remain committed to work with Members to ensure treatment for cotton that is consistent with the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration. However, in our view, the draft text on cotton fails to take into account reductions to cotton- specific support relative to other commodities through the general formula. We have stated consistently that one cannot determine the application of the Hong Kong text until one knows the outcome from the basic disciplines. We continue to believe that the only path forward is through that sequence. Finally, it is only logical that Members who are in compliance with their domestic support obligations should not be subject to dispute settlement actions over such measures. nama The key to a successful NAMA result is the coefficients in the Swiss formula. Unfortunately, the range proposed in the draft text for the approximately 30 developing countries applying the coefficient is too high, and the gap between the developed and the developing coefficients is too wide to achieve our twin goals of creating new market access opportunities for all while adhering to the principle of less-than-full-reciprocity in reduction commitments. In terms of both absolute ambition in NAMA and ambition relative to what is under negotiation in agricultural domestic support, the proposed range for the 30 or so developing countries falls short. At the end of the day, it is the new tariffs that everyone's businesses will be paying that will help determine whether we have a worthwhile outcome. We all need a result that provides meaningful new market access for our workers and manufacturers. Without such a result, we will not have concluded a truly pro-development Round. Therefore, our aim must be to improve the balance of contributions as we ensure a high level of ambition overall. The gap between the developed and developing country coefficients is too wide, particularly when one factors in the array of flexibilities available to developing countries. And the proposed range for the developed countries' coefficient of 8-9 is not realistic, given that many rapidly growing advanced developing countries are offering little beyond binding currently applied tariff rates. For example, currently, the average applied tariff for the 30 developing countries applying the formula is just over twice the average rate applied by developed countries. Under any scenario in this text, this ratio would widen so that the average end rate for developing countries applying the formula would be more than three times the average end rate for developed countries. The pattern is similar for bound rates. Furthermore, under any scenario in the draft text, no developed country would have a double-digit tariff anywhere, whereas even under the Chair's most aggressive formulation for developing countries, high tariffs would remain. For example, while the highest U.S. tariff would fall below 8%, several developing countries could maintain tariffs above 60%. In terms of relative contributions, the developed countries would account for more than 75% of all the duties forgone as a result of the proposed tariff reduction ranges. The five largest developing countries would absorb less than 20%, and all the other formula countries would absorb barely 5%. Of course, the majority of developing countries don't have to apply the formula at all. We agree with the Chair's assessment that sectoral arrangements are a key element in the framework to reach the mandate. Sectorals are a concrete way to improve the ambition and balance in this round. They are an effective tool in helping developing countries attract investment that will plug their economies into the global supply networks that are the international business model of today. services Services is one of the three critical pillars of the Doha market access negotiations, and an essential element in meeting the development promise of Doha. It simply is not possible to develop a competitive, growing economy without providing access to world-class services in key areas such as financial services, telecommunications, express delivery, and distribution. As we focus on achieving agreement on modalities for Agriculture and NAMA, we also must define what is necessary to achieve a level of ambition for services that is at least on par with the level of ambition for Agriculture and NAMA. In our view, that means both binding what already is open as well as making new commitments in services market access. We therefore believe it would be important for the Services Chairman to hold consultations in September, including possibly open-ended meetings, with a view to producing a services document at the time that modalities for Ag and NAMA are agreed. Such a document will be necessary to set a timetable for revised offers and final negotiations, as well as to articulate an appropriate level of ambition for services at this stage of the negotiations. In the meantime, we all need to be working at home to prepare the groundwork with our domestic regulators and stakeholders for our revised offers. conclusion The only way to achieve a Doha success--and the only way to meet the development goals of Doha--is through a result that actually expands international trade. Our aim must remain to achieve a balance that reflects the broadest array of offensive interests across the market access pillars of agriculture, NAMA, and Services. The only way to do this is to attain the highest level of ambition if each. For the U.S., there is no higher international trade priority than a successful conclusion of an ambitious Doha Round. For our part, we will come to the table prepared to carry forward our work, fully equipped with the will and flexibility necessary. We ask that our trading partners do likewise.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. I thank the gentlewoman.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Chairman, I don't have any amendment at the desk, but I do wish to rise in support of the 2008 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Act and to commend the committee, particularly the chairwoman from New York, for the fine work that has been done to get the bill to this point. I want to bring attention to a very important aspect of the bill: funding for trade capacity building. This bill raises the Federal appropriation level to $214 million. That is $87 million more than the administration requested. Obviously there are many different points of view on trade in this body, but I think all of us can agree that we must do everything possible to enable developing countries to facilitate trade with the world. Most people think of trade infrastructure projects when they think of trade capacity. But facilitating trade goes well beyond that. These funds will help developing countries with labor and environmental law enforcement and provide technical assistance for better trade access in remote areas. Trade capacity assistance is a relatively new tool in the trade arena, but it has recently played an important role in the implementation of trade and will continue to play a critical role as we consider several free trade agreements with developing countries that are eligible to receive capacity building from our Nation. I thank the chairwoman for maintaining the commitment to trade capacity funds in recent agreements, and I hope to work closely with the committee on follow-up and oversight of trade capacity funds, past and in the present. Hopefully, in the near future, we will have the opportunity to consider this on the floor with countries such as Peru, Panama and Colombia. All of these nations need trade capacity assistance, but Colombia is arguably the country with the most intense and persistent challenges. I look forward to working closely with the committee and USAID to see that we dedicate some of the increased funds in this bill to help Colombia meet critical needs, like assistance for its Fiscalia, the Office of the Attorney General. The Fiscalia bears the overwhelming responsibility of continuing the progress towards security and peace in Colombia, with investigations of murders and kidnappings, particularly those of labor leaders, and managing the legal process of the demobilization of paramilitaries and the FARC. The Fiscalia needs as much support as we can offer it if it is going to expeditiously carry out the hundreds of investigations and legislative demands that it must meet as an independent agency of justice. I hope my colleagues who share my concern over violence in Colombia, particularly in remote areas populated by African Colombians and attacks against labor leaders, will support the 2008 Foreign Operations bill and join me in calling for trade capacity funds specifically dedicated to those countries who are cooperating with us to make strides toward a more secure hemisphere.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Absolutely.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. As a result of that, and I'm direct evidence of it, what they will do is then they will begin to educate their kids so that they can now send their kids to school. And that becomes their focus--to make sure that the next generation is better than theirs as far as education is concerned and health care. It's exactly what we've done in this country. So why should we just say it's exclusively for us and not want to share the benefits of what we've gained in this country with others? That's what leadership is all about, and that's all that we're doing here. We're not saying that we're going to turn our backs on other individuals, say we're going to help them, and we're going to help yourselves, because you know what, the number one jobs, when you look about creating jobs in America, it's services. The services are creating jobs over and over and over and time and again. And what we're doing also by, you know, trading with our services in other areas, we're creating jobs and opportunities, and, in fact, our businesses, I often say this, become our best ambassadors because they look at the jobs that Americans have created, and they say, well, thank you for lifting us up, thank you, for showing us that you are not turning your backs on us, thank you, because we're the only superpower in the world. So folks are looking at us to be leaders in that regard, and if we turn our backs on them, leaving these individuals not to have hope and opportunity for tomorrow, then we will become the ones that's isolated them, and we should not. It's good foreign policy. It's good domestic policy, and it just makes overall, good moral sense.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. You're absolutely right, and here's another reason why trade agreements are important, because if you look at particularly our recent trade agreements, what they do is they level the trade balance. Because a lot of these nations, when you talk about Central America, they were already open to come to our market. They were open to come to the United States. We didn't have access to theirs. So we were able to level the trade imbalances. And, in fact, when you talk about where we have the biggest imbalance, happens to be with China, but you know what the fact of the matter is? We do not have an FTA agreement with China. We don't even have one with India. We've negotiated them. We were able to negotiate them so that we can balance it so that it's fair to both sides as opposed to it being unfair on one side. You use the FTAs as an agreement to balance the playing field, to balance the trade imbalances to a large degree as well, as well as create hope and opportunity for people both abroad and at home. Some folks say they don't like trade at all. Well, I challenge them, especially if you're poor. I come from the southeastern Queens in New York. I was raised in public housing. There's certain things that we can't afford, and I look at poor people, a number of them, some of the trade has helped them because they can now buy some goods that they may not have otherwise been able to afford. So we've got to look at both sides of this. It has created some jobs. Where we've got to make sure that we're focused in the country is the competitiveness issue. So we've got to make sure that we're educating our young people so that they can take the jobs, the high-paying jobs that, I might add, that globalization and us being a leader in technology and information technology in particular and the services, that we can create opportunities for them. So, yeah, are there some dangers. If we allow our public educational system to continue to go downhill, and we don't now focus on it, and we don't make sure that our people are educated so that they can take the high-paying jobs that are being created, then, yes, we're in danger of succeeding as a country, period. Education is our greatest resource, and competitiveness is where we've got to go, and that's what our focus should be. We should be working out together to make sure that we're competitive with the rest of the globe because otherwise we lose out on this. It's not as if to say globalization is a bad thing that's going to go away tomorrow. Obviously it's not, and it's helping millions of people. There are 6 billion people in the world, 6 billion people in the world. There's only 300 million of us in the United States of America, 300 million. And of the 6 billion people in the world, over 3 billion of them live on less than $2 a day. Why? They're in the informal sector. Why? There's no hope and opportunities for them. Don't you think that as we being the only world superpower, that we can do something better; being humane, being the country that we are, we could do something better for them?

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Let me conclude with this. Number one, I want to just compliment Chairman Rangel and Chairman Levin. They have done a great job. I mean, it's something the Democrats have been asking for since the 1990s, I've been in Congress, to make sure it's been included in every trade bill. They've done a fantastic job to make sure that we protect environmental rights and labor rights, et cetera. We care about those individuals that we know are going to be hurt, because in any agreement there are people that get hurt, and when we talk about we've got to do a real comprehensive program so people can be retrained and go back to work. Now that's even more than just trade agreements, because, you know, if you check it out, really, more people have lost their jobs through efficiency and technology. Think about it. How many people does it take to produce a car today than it did yesterday. When you need a telephone operator, does anyone pick up? It's technology that picks up the telephone. You know, EZPass, and all the conveniences that we currently have. We better do a better job. I think that Mr. Rangel and Mr. Levin have put that in that we will do a better job, and retraining Americans who are hurt, not only because of trade, but who are out of the job for any reason, whether it's technology or because of a trade agreement. As Democrats, we are focused on that. We can do that. We can do good by our folks at home, but we also can do good by the people abroad so that we can be the leaders of the Nation. We are the world's only super power.