Gregory Meeks

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, during the week of the World Philatelic Exhibition being held at the Washington Convention Center, to recognize the history of the Black Heritage Stamp Series and to honor my former constituent, Chairman and Founder of the Black American Heritage Foundation, Mr. Clarence Irving. In 1976, Mr. Irving conceived the idea of commemorating Black American Women on U.S. Postage Stamps. His proposal was that either of two women, Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune or Mary Church Terrell be so commemorated. This proposal was presented to the Honorable Joseph P. Addabbo who represented my district at the time and the initiative became part of the activities surrounding the bicentennial celebration of the United States. Two years later, the U.S. Postal Service created a completely new series commemorating Black Americans, with Harriet Tubman chosen as the first historical figure to start the ``Black Heritage USA Series''. Each year another stamp appears in this commemorative series honoring a prominent African American figure. Today, at 82, Clarence Irving still heads the Black American Heritage Foundation, organizing or supporting African American art initiatives throughout the country. I am grateful for his determination in realizing his vision and acknowledge him as the ``Father of the Black Heritage Stamp Series''.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, in a ceremony held February 2, 2006, in the Mansfield Room of the U.S. Capitol and attended by many Members of Congress, U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman and South Korean Minister of Trade Hyun-Chong Kim announced the commencement of negotiations toward a U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement and signaled their commitment to conclude the talks by March 2007. The U.S. and Korea plan to implement the agreement by September 2007. In light of the fact that the FTA negotiations will officially begin next week, I rise to recognize the significance of this undertaking. Launching the United States-South Korea FTA talks is a critical step in the relationship with an important U.S. strategic ally and economic partner. I strongly believe that as we pursue market access for U.S. exporters, it is to our advantage to strengthen already constructive relationships with our allies. South Korea is our seventh largest trading partner and a friend in a challenging region of the world. Advancing the economic relationship makes sense and will be an important benefit to two great nations. Close engagement between the U.S. and South Korea has paved the way for FTA negotiations. Even before the official announcement, the South Korean Government demonstrated how important it considers improved trade relations with the United States. South Korea took the concrete step of reducing the long-standing quotas that limited the screening of films by the American entertainment industry. I am encouraged by the progress that has been made so far on addressing several trade concerns. I am confident that South Korea will continue to work closely with the USTR Rob Portman toward making this endeavor a success. The FTA negotiations will officially begin on May 3, following the expiration of the statutory 90-day consultative period. In the interim, our two governments have agreed to hold preliminary discussions. According to reports, once the FTA takes full effect, over 90 percent of traded goods between the U.S. and Korea will be phased out over 10 years. Mr. Speaker, in the interest of underscoring the importance of these talks, permit me to list a few salient facts about the U.S.-Korean economic relationship. South Korea is a stable, democratic country with a free-enterprise economy and a gross domestic product of $726.5 billion in 2005, making it the world's 11th largest economy. The per capita income of South Koreans in 2004 is an impressive $14,162. As noted by the Los Angeles Times, South Korea is now the seventh largest trading partner of the United States, with over $72 billion in trade volume each year. Moreover, South Korea is the fifth largest market for U.S. agricultural products. U.S. exports into South Korea totaled $25.1 billion through November of 2005, up 4.6 percent from the same period in 2004, with the biggest U.S. sales coming in computer chips, $4.2 billion; industrial machinery, $1.4 billion, organic chemicals, $1.3 billion, and civilian aircraft at $953 million. At the same time, South Korean exports to the United States totaled $40.1 billion through November 2005, down 5.4 percent from the same period in 2004, with the biggest South Korean sales coming in passenger cars, $7.2 billion; household goods, including cell phones, at $5.7 billion; computer chips, $2.8 billion; and computer accessories, televisions, and VCRs at $3.9 billion. According to a study done in 2001 by the U.S. International Trade Commission, a U.S.-Korea free-trade agreement could increase U.S. exports to South Korea by $19 billion and U.S. imports from South Korea by $10 billion. Finally, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce, during the 2004 calendar year, 627,000 South Koreans visited the United States for tourism and business travel, representing the fifth largest foreign market of tourists, excluding Canada and Mexico. Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, I wish to recognize the launch of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement negotiations and I encourage my colleagues to offer their own expressions of support. South Korea is a longstanding and trustworthy ally of the United States and a mutual FTA would only further solidify and reinforce our alliance partnership.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Bahrain Free Trade Agreement. This agreement is good for the United States, and it is good for Bahrain. It has real trade benefits. But beyond that, it will strengthen relations with one of our most steadfast friends in the Middle East. Progress made on labor and economic reforms can stand as a model for future trade agreements with the Middle East. The Ways and Means Committee's bipartisan approval of the U.S.- Bahrain Free Trade Agreement is symbolic of the cooperative and supportive relationship that exists between the two countries. This agreement will bring benefits to both countries, strengthen economic ties, and promote social, political, and economic opportunities. The Bahrainis have taken difficult, but important, progressive steps that will elevate standards in Bahrain and help promote stability in the Middle East. Bahrain has been a steadfast American ally through World War II, the gulf war, and the war on terrorism. Bahrain has implemented multiple substantive reforms over the past few years, including the adoption of a new constitution to transform the country from a hereditary emirate to a constitutional monarchy, the creation of a bicameral legislature, and granting suffrage to all citizens over 18 years of age. In addition, Bahrain has made significant improvements to its labor laws and has dismantled its Arab League boycott of Israel. My friends, globalization is here. And as Tom Friedman indicated, yes, indeed, the world is flat. We have made sure that we are more interdependent upon one another; and it is good to be interdependent, because with that interdependence, we as a Nation begin to depend on others in this world. The world is much smaller than it was just 40 years ago. As we become dependent upon one another, raising the standards of living all over this world, we then indeed ensure a safer United States of America and a more harmonized world. I say let us vote for this. It is good for America, it is good for Bahrain, and it is good for the Middle East.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to tell my constituents and the American people that the raid is still in progress. The House Republican leadership continues its attempt to further raid the Nation's coffers and rob our citizens of important services. Last week, Republicans had to pull their budget reconciliation from the House floor, temporarily preventing a disastrous fiscal blow that will dig an even deeper deficit hole. This week they continue efforts to force through Congress over $50 billion in cuts to important programs, including student loans, Medicaid, child support and child support enforcement. Despite shameful attempts to disguise these cuts and services as necessary tough choices, the budget reconciliation funds an additional $70 billion in misguided tax cuts for the wealthy and neglects the billions needed for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction efforts. Democrats are holding Republicans accountable for enormously irresponsible spending that has managed to turn the surplus that the President inherited into an $8 trillion deficit. Fortunately, there are a few honest Republicans who know that the budget plan will make the national debt worse by adding an additional $20 billion to the already record-high deficit. They know they have lost their way with years of increased spending and indefensible tax cuts. I hope that they stand strong and may not do what is responsible or what is popular in their conference, but do what is right for the American people.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Speaker, the world is much smaller today than it was; and when we particularly focus in on the Middle East, we need peace. However, I am deeply disturbed by the remarks of the new Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, when he was addressing 4,000 students, using the language of Ayatollah Khomeini, where he says and threatens: ``Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury.'' Who is this guy? We cannot allow this kind of language to stand in this day and age. We must make sure that we condemn this kind of language and those kinds of acts. Here is a guy with a questionable background. Some of our hostages say that he is the individual who was there when they were held in Iran. The international community must come together and make sure that there are no nuclear reactors there. We must make sure that it is clear that we are going to stand by our friends and allies in Israel in this regards and that we are going to be the ones that are going to force peace to be in the Middle East and we are not going to have this kind of rhetoric language continuing. We cannot allow this man with this questionable background to continue to go unchecked.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Madam Speaker, it is with great pain that I stand here today to mourn the recent passing of several phenomenal women and leaders in our Nation's struggle for equal justice under the law. The passing of Rosa Parks and Judge Constance Baker Motley is a sad reality, but I stand to commemorate their triumphant lives. Judge Motley and Rosa Parks faced racism head on and continued to work for a more just world until their last days. Rosa Parks was 92 years old and almost made it to the 50th anniversary of the Montgomery bus boycott, which she set in motion by refusing to give her seat to a white man on Montgomery's segregated city bus system. Mrs. Parks was arrested for her action. As a New Yorker, I hold dearly the legacy of Judge Constance Baker Motley. That is why I introduced legislation to honor her. Constance Baker Motley won nine out of 10 civil rights cases she argued before the Supreme Court. She worked on all of the major school segregation cases, including Brown v. Board of Education, and advised civil rights leaders including Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Judge Motley was the first African-American woman to serve in the New York State Senate. She was the first black woman to be appointed to a Federal judgeship. Rosa Parks once said, ``Memories of our lives, of our works, and our deeds will continue in others.'' She was absolutely right. Not only will the memories live on, but the legacy has forever stirred the resolve of many in our Nation to advocate for social justice, human dignity, and harmony.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Committee on Financial Services, I am shocked and disappointed in the result of what up until now has been a true bipartisan policy-making effort. We in this committee this past May passed a bill, H.R. 1461, by a vote of 65-5. There was true bipartisanship. In fact, just yesterday I was talking about how the committee was working collectively together and there was really bipartisanship and we would come up with a bill that we could agree upon. How wrong, how wrong I am. Unfortunately, the Republican Study Committee got involved and has pushed for an unjust and unnecessary amendment that restricts nonprofits that do not have housing as their primary purpose or engage in nonpartisan voter registration or education programs from receiving funds and grants. Just look at it. I look at my district. My predecessor at Allen AME is known for developing public-private housing that is affordable to people, and they would not be able to participate. Look at what would be left out with this ridiculous amendment. Furthermore, if you read this amendment, it clearly states in its language that the restrictions for not-for-profits are not the same restrictions as for-profits. I wonder if for-profits can engage in whatever they want to and still be able to participate in these fundings, but not-for-profits would not. It seems to me there is a lot of talk, talk about democracy; but we truly do not want democracy. We are trying to lock out a whole group of people from having the opportunity to vote. When we look at the numbers of people who come out to vote, the numbers are far less than the percentages any place else. We should be doing everything in our power to encourage people to come out to vote. I wonder why the Republicans are doing this. For if they feel so strong and righteous about their manager's amendment, they surely would have allowed the Frank amendment which would have stripped this destructive language before a vote. They did not do this because they are afraid their own Republican Members that support the CDCs and faith-based affordable housing programs would vote in favor of the Frank amendment. There is no democracy for the Republican Caucus. This was an excellent bill that the radical right wing of the Republican Caucus has destroyed.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, in his September 17, 2005, address to the 60th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Kurmanbek Bakiev, President of the Kyrgyz Republic, called on his fellow Heads of State to join him in supporting U.N. peace keeping by fighting poverty and promoting democratic development. President Bakiev told the U.N. General Assembly ``it is no accident that exactly in the poorest regions of the world the most serious regional conflicts arise''. Kyrgyzstan, the only state in Central Asia that participates in peace making efforts by the United Nations, has directed military observers and staff officers to the missions of the United Nations in Liberia, Burundi, Sierra Leone, Serbia, Kosovo, and Sudan. On September 23, 2005, Leandro Despouy, Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, praised Kyrgyzstan's courageous leadership in supporting the resettlement of Uzbek refugees to third countries along with its commitment to the Geneva Convention. Mr. Despouy called on international donors to provide financial support for Kyrgyzstan's reform programs. Kyrgyzstan has also been a critical ally in the international community's efforts to rebuild and strengthen Afghanistan. It has made its territory available to the coalition to combat terrorism and promote regional safety and security. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share with my congressional colleagues President Bakiev's September 17, 2005, address to the United Nations' 60th General Assembly and ask that it be printed in the Congressional Record. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Secretary General, dear delegates, ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I would like to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, on your election to the responsible post of Chairman of the Sixtieth Anniversary Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations and to wish you every success in so honorable and noble a mission. Let me also express words of gratitude to your predecessor Mr. Jean Ping for the successful moderation of the previous session of the Assembly. Mr. Chairman, the Summit of the United Nations which came to an end yesterday confirmed that the United Nations Organization remains the universal organization capable of bringing important contributions to the matters of strengthening international peace and security, the maintenance of sustainable development, and the search for adequate answers to new global challenges and threats. In this regard, I hope that the 60th Anniversary Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations becomes the major event in our time, and will give to all mankind a feeling of confidence and hope in our future. Rapid changes in the world have not bypassed Kyrgyzstan. Our people, not remaining indifferent to its own destiny, in March of this year have chosen the way of development, progress and creativity. In the new history of Kyrgyzstan, one more page has been turned. We enter into the 21st century with firm determination to realize the deep expectations and hopes for peace, prosperity, progress and freedom. We are confident that the goals reflected in the Millennium Declaration will be realized fully for the benefit of each person in the Kyrgyz Republic. To keep the respect and to justify hopes of people, the United Nations cannot lag behind the fast and accelerated changes in the world. It should not only respond to these realities, but also create more effective mechanisms of prevention and confrontation to both new challenges and risks. In this regard, we in Kyrgyzstan are deeply convinced that reform of the United Nations should be reflective of the will, the fundamental rights and interests of all states- members and people. In previous years, the Security Council has been repeatedly criticized for failures in the field of maintenance of international peace and security. Therefore, for all of us, it is extremely important that the Security Council most effectively carry out the basic preservation of peace, international order and tranquility. Kyrgyzstan consistently supports expansion of the membership of the Security Council and reforming of its methods of work so that it will become more representative and democratic, and consequently more effective. It is our belief that the reform of the Security Council should be based on principles of universality, efficiency and wide geographical representation. Decisions of the Security Council should be, as much as possible, timely, and their implementation correspondingly expeditious. The Kyrgyz Republic shares the position that reform of the system of the United Nations will be successful only insofar as the reform of the Security Council will be followed with reform of both the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council. We support the efforts aimed at the more pervasive activity of the General Assembly and strengthening of coordination functions of the Economic and Social Council. Effective coordination between these three principal bodies is extremely important for the complex decision making regarding current urgent problems. We all realize how great and complex are the challenges facing the United Nations in the area of maintenance of global peace and security. In this regard, I would like to note that Kyrgyzstan also intends to make a contribution. And for the first time, it has nominated its own candidature for non-permanent membership of the Security Council for the period of 2012-2013. We realize the full extent of membership responsibility in this key body of the United Nations Organization. I can assure you that Kyrgyzstan will use its best efforts to activate cooperation with the member states in all regions and become the reliable partner in the decisions of global policy. Mr. Chairman, I would like also to note that today the United Nations and its institutes are more engaged with the issues of development than security. In a scene in which many organizations of the United Nations system constantly deal with problems of development, there is only one constantly operating body which deals with problems of security. In our opinion in conditions of globalization and strengthening of interdependence and the risks connected both with technological and natural disasters along with international terrorism and extremism, the functions of the United Nations on maintenance of global security should be considerably strengthened. In this regard, along with the programs connected with development, the preventive measures directed to security also should be strengthened. The history of international affairs of the second half of the last century shows that it is practically impossible to support successfully international peace and security until the basic conditions necessary for people's existence are created. Poverty and deprivation often bring to escalation the infringements of international peace and security. It is no accident that exactly in the poorest regions of the world, the most serious regional conflicts arise. Simultaneously to reach the purposes of security and of development, the international community should carry out a more balanced policy. It is necessary for the world community to work actively in overcoming distinctions and inequalities between the countries of the North and the South. In our opinion, the United Nations requires the creation of such interactive mechanisms which will remove the problems causing the poorest countries to drop out of universal development, and their participation in decision making. The countries of the South should become full participants in the decisions involving global problems. Kyrgyzstan remains devoted to the Monterey Consensus according to which the developed countries will increase development aid, and poor countries in their transformation will use this aid more effectively. At various authoritative forums, an understanding of the Concepts of Sustainable Economic Development and Sustainable Human Development has been reached. We completely support this. These concepts, with substantive provisions, will find reflection in our national strategy and programs. At the same time, successful realization of national programs of the various countries is directly connected with regional and international cooperation. On this joint interest, the role of the United Nations and its agencies, with a view of fast achievement of mutual understanding, coordination of mutual efforts should be considerably strengthened. We support the proposal on drafting a National strategy of development and its adoption in 2006 and achievement by 2015 as parameters of implementation of the purposes in the field of the development, formulated in the Millennium Declarations. In our opinion, the United Nations should mobilize new resources, strengthen coordination and increase the contribution regarding decisions on problems of development. We consider that it is time for donor countries to move from the declaration of obligations to concrete actions. In this regard the Kyrgyz Republic welcomes the decision of the European Union to allocate 0.7 percent of the GDP as an official aid of development by 2009. Besides, the Kyrgyz Republic supports the necessity of a comprehensible level of debts and acceptance of urgent and scale measures on the simplification of debt burden for developing countries. Kyrgyzstan is a mountain country. The mountain states are characterized by remoteness, difficult accessibility, information inaccessibility, severe geo-climatic conditions, greater expenses for maintenance of life. At the same time, receiving the financial aid from the developed countries Kyrgyzstan itself is the donor on rendering eco-system services whose value yearly increases. So, for example, the Kyrgyz Republic is one of the basic repositories of glaciers and the supplier of fresh water in the region. Besides, within the International Convention on Preservation of Biological Variety, there is in Kyrgyzstan the operation of a network of biosphere territories. Kyrgyzstan emits into the atmosphere much less hotbed gases than the majority of the countries of the world, and thus brings a contribution to the preservation of an ozone cloud of the planet. Simultaneously, to our great regret, in our territory, there are storehouses of radioactive waste--an inheritance from a military-industrial complex of the former Soviet period. Their maintenance and the prevention of further potential ecological accidents for the entire Central Asian region are an excessive burden for Kyrgyzstan. We consider that the international community at a coordinating role of the United Nations, should concern itself more closely to such zones of high ecological risk and render sufficient financial and technical aid directed at the prevention of global and regional ecological disasters. We also consider that for the decisions of a national scale, the United Nations should promote more actively the participation of the poor and developing countries regarding sustainable development. The presence of a big debt interferes with sustainable social and economic development of mountain territories. In addition to wider initiatives on the maintenance of readiness for disasters and mitigation of their consequences, Kyrgyzstan supports initiatives on the creation of a worldwide early warning system on acts of nature. As a mountain country Kyrgyzstan constantly collides with regular and often repeating acts of nature--earthquakes, landslips, avalanches, flooding of cities and settlements. Our long experience on liquidation of consequences of similar disasters takes huge sums from economic and social development and thus highlights the importance of strengthening ecological security. As a first step, Kyrgyzstan suggests the use of its territory as a pilot area for the prevention and mitigation of consequences of such kind of natural disasters. Mr. Chairman, I would like to express also support to the proposal on the establishment of a Committee of the regional organizations under the United Nations. It will allow the involvement of unused potential of the regional and sub-regional organizations in the prevention and settlement of conflicts and also other important regional problems. The regional structures having the corresponding potential and effectively acting at the present moment should play a complementary role before new threats and challenges. Kyrgyzstan supports participation in work of this Committee of such organizations, as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Organization of the Treaty on Collective Security, the Euro-Asian Economic Union and the Organization of the Central Asian Cooperation. We also support the measures directed to an increase of efficiency of peace-making operations; in this regard we welcome the proposal of the Secretary General on the establishment of strategic reserves for activity of the United Nations on maintenance of the world and reserve potential of civil police of the United Nations. The Kyrgyz Republic is the only state in Central Asia that participates in peace-making efforts of the United Nations, having directed military observers and staff officers in the Missions of the United Nations in Liberia, Burundi, Sierra Leone, Serbia and Montenegro (Kosovo) and Sudan. We are proud that we bring our contribution to the efforts of the United Nations to these countries and are fully determined to give support to such noble activity. Kyrgyzstan actively supports efforts of the international community on restoration and strengthening of the world in Afghanistan and has given its territory for accommodation of forces of the Antiterrorist coalition and the Organization of the Contract about collective safety, providing measures on maintenance of safety in region. Kyrgyzstan actively supports efforts of the international community on restoration and strengthening of the peace in Afghanistan and has given the territory for accommodation of forces of the Antiterrorist coalition and the Organization of the Treaty on Collective security, providing measures on maintenance of security in region. We remain devoted to the establishment of the nuclear Free Zone in the Central Asia. Now the text of the relevant Treaty is coordinated by five countries of region and we are glad that the depository of the Treaty will be the Kyrgyz Republic. We believe that it is testimony of high trust and a recognition of the contribution of our republic in the implementation of the initiative establishing a Nuclear-free Zone. I am firmly convinced that the establishment of a Zone free from nuclear weapons in our region will promote the strengthening of global security and regional stability. We hope to obtain corresponding support of the world community. In conclusion Mr. Chairman, I would like to note that the world community experiences a complex period of formation of a new system of international affairs. Already, it is clear that it will be a long process. The states--members of the United Nations should affirm their readiness to achieve practical solutions to the most essential problems of our time: to struggle with poverty, famine, illnesses, to provide sustainable development. The 60th session of the General Assembly should remain with us in memory as the session of reforms. Thank you for your attention.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration's Registered Traveler program. Like many of my colleagues, I was shocked to learn last month that the TSA has discontinued the Registered Traveler pilot program operating at five commercial airports. While TSA claims they need time to evaluate the pilot program before expanding, I contend they have been slow to act and, as a result, are depriving the traveling public, particularly frequent travelers, a more efficient, effective and safer manner of proceeding through airport security. TSA has been running the pilot programs since the summer of 2004. Each one was advertised to be 90 days in duration, at which point decisions about further deployment would be made. However, we find ourselves now over a year since these pilot programs began with TSA still saying they need additional time to evaluate it. I do not buy it. This is a classic example of the Federal Government being slow in making critical decisions about a program which we know to be a success and a program that we know also makes us safer. Now, the TSA is continuing to operate a sixth pilot program at Orlando International Airport that they launched this past June. The Orlando pilot is different from the five pilots that have been shut down in that it is a public-private partnership that is run in conjunction with the airport, its vendor and TSA. I believe this public-private partnership is the way to go, as it will allow the private sector to add additional strengths to the programs, such as offering greater flexibility in meeting the needs and customer expectations, making rapid decisions on capital investment, and customizing programs based on intimate knowledge of the local market. The Registered Traveler program has promise, and I believe in it. However, due to the manner in which the pilot programs were structured and the lack of decision-making at TSA, this program is in jeopardy of not getting off the ground at the national level. First and foremost, there are too few measurable benefits at the security checkpoint for individuals enrolled in the Registered Traveler program. Why does TSA collect a list of personal data on an individual and then subject him or her to a security threat assessment and provide so few measurable benefits? I contend that if the Federal Government knows who you are by running your information against terrorist watch lists and other government databases, then they should provide more meaningful benefits at the security checkpoint such as not having you take off your shoes or not having you take off your coat or perhaps allowing nonticketed individuals back to the gates, as we did prior to 9/11, where they have our fingerprints and our eye retinas to make sure that we are safe going through. These are common sense benefits that can and should have been granted to individuals who sign up for this program. With not providing real benefits such as these, TSA is running the risk of killing this program before it is even started. I am also extremely concerned with this language contained in the DHS conference report that provides a monopoly in my view to one organization to be the central collector and aggregator for biometric data necessary for the background vetting of the Registered Traveler program like other programs. This is not the approach we should be headed in in the United States Congress. We should be promoting competition, growth and an even playing field. And with a public- private partnership like the public-private partnership taking place in Orlando, the American people will win, and the options and competitive environment will be what we need to make us safer.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, ``Four years ago this month, the City I represent fell victim to a major disaster now infamously known as 9/11. When that happened we received the world's sympathy and we expected and received the support of the federal government to help us rebuild. Last December, the world came to the aid of Southeast Asian nations when the Indian Ocean leapt upon the shores of Indonesia, Sri Lanka and other coastal nations. The world responded and the U.S. Federal government stepped up to the plate. Once again, disaster has struck, this time in the form of hurricane Katrina. Again, thousands of people will have lost their lives and ten times that have lost their homes and livelihood. The world is offering its sympathy and support and Congress is meeting its responsibility by providing the Federal Government with $10.5 billion in initial emergency aid. Certainly more will be needed, and more will be provided. Additionally, I urge my fellow members of Congress to work with their local communities on neighborhood efforts to provide support for the relief efforts. As Americans we have many differences amongst us. Differences in race, religion and political ideologies to name a few. However, we have two commonalities that supercede those differences--we are all Americans and we are all human beings. As it was four years ago in my City of New York, it is today in our Gulf region. Let us respond today as we did then with overwhelming compassion and support for fellow members of our American-human family''.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, let me state outright that I am opposed to this amendment simply because we cannot allow our soldiers to remain under siege for an indefinite period of time while Congress has no serious answers from the administration about the core challenges we face in Iraq, the progress we have made and/or a strategy for success. When we invaded Iraq, the administration claimed that we would be received as great liberators and that we would start withdrawing troops in just a few short months. But instead we face a strong insurgency, rising death toll with over 1,700 soldiers dead and at least 13,400 wounded in action. The disastrous miscalculations and misleading estimates that surround this war have exacted a very high toll on the American purse and our families. I cannot agree to any legislation that calls for us to continue this course while Congress is denied critical information needed to evaluate our progress in Iraq. The amendment before us calls for the transfer of responsibility to Iraqi forces only when they are ready to assume such responsibility. However, it fails to address a plan for improving the training of Iraqi soldiers that will enable them to take on that responsibility. How will Iraqi forces ever assume responsibility if we fail to adequately train them? Sadly, we have no real answers and no real strategy for shifting responsibility and reducing U.S. involvement financially and militarily. Congress has in good faith provided this administration with billions of dollars for military efforts in Iraq. This body has lived up to its end of the bargain and provided funding for our troops. But our questions and concerns about our progress go unanswered. Our Constitution was carefully crafted to allow a balance of power in our government. I oppose this amendment because I refuse to abandon that balance and surrender the responsibility of this body to hold the administration accountable for its actions.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am rising in support of this amendment partly because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle refuse to include reasonable amendments that direct or redirect funds to help the most in need in Colombia. In fact, they refuse to move on to a more balanced policy on Colombia. For example, Afro-Colombians comprise approximately 26 percent of Colombia's total population. Nevertheless, they are overrepresented amongst the poorest of the poor. Eighty-two percent of this disadvantaged minority lack even basic public services. There are problems with this bill, and we should not continue to throw good money after bad. Plan Colombia had 5 or 6 years to prove itself, and what it has proven is that the plan has caused more harm than good. Eighty percent of U.S. assistance to Colombia goes to the military and police. We need a more balanced policy on Colombia. Plan Colombia's aerial fumigation strategy has forced coca growers not to stop growing but to move their coca crops further west and north to Afro-Colombian and indigenous territories. Fumigation is ruining food crops, animals and livestock, while threatening the health and environment of Afro-Colombians, especially in the department of Choco. In 2002, only two municipalities in the department of Choco registered some sort of coca crops. Today, all 31 municipalities in that region have coca crops. Plan Colombia is destroying the traditional cultures of Afro-Colombians and their communities while providing little or no alternative development aid. Furthermore, a primary U.S. objective for Plan Colombia has been to prevent the flow of illegal drugs into the United States. In my district in southeastern Queens, New York, and on the streets of the United States of America, cocaine remains available today and at lower prices than ever and the levels of use are stable, if not rising. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I ask my colleagues in conference to support alternative development and social programs that work and can make our policy in Colombia more balanced and thereby giving the American people a better bang for their buck in Colombia.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to urge the House to restore full funding for public broadcasting. The Republican House appropriators' unwise decision to cut funding totaling 45 percent is offensive to the millions of Americans who rely on PBS for news and information. Parents depend on PBS to provide their children with wholesome programming that is educational and free of charge. But not only children benefit from PBS. Their programs and services also educate adults and engage people in the sciences, history and arts; and inform viewers and listeners of local and world events. As a result, PBS programming helps Americans engage as literate citizens of their respective communities. The Republican Party who preaches about family values and morality is turning its back on millions of Americans who seek decent, wholesome programming free from the smut and violence that has infested the airwaves. Only the GOP would assassinate Big Bird, Elmo and Barney with one vicious swipe of their mean-spirited, budget-cutting sword. It is time that my friends on the other side of the aisle match their values rhetoric with their actions and restore full funding for our families by giving PBS the Federal moneys it justly deserves.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to reject any attempts to withdraw the United States from the WTO and vote no on final passage. When instituted correctly and fairly, trade agreements open up foreign markets to U.S. goods, create new opportunities for companies and their employees, and lift the standard of living for people in the country with whom we are trading. Economists estimate that cutting trade barriers in agriculture, manufacturing and services by one-third would boost the world economy by $613 billion, equivalent to adding an economy the size of Canada to the world economy. The WTO is needed to monitor this process and ensure a level playing field. However, in certain cases, there is not a level playing field. A great example of this is Airbus. Airbus is currently the world's leading manufacturer of civil aircraft, with about 50 percent of global market share. Airbus received approximately $30 billion in market- distorting subsidies from the European governments, including launch aid, infrastructure support, debt forgiveness, equity infusions, and research and development funding. These subsidies, in particular launch aid, have lowered Airbus' development costs and shifted the risk of aircraft development to European governments, and thereby enabled Airbus to develop aircraft at an accelerated pace and sell these aircraft at prices and on terms that would otherwise be unsustainable. These unfair actions put Boeing at a major disadvantage and leads to a negative impact to workers and businesses in this country. By most conservative estimates, the unfair subsidies that Airbus receives have led the United States to losing at least 60,000 high-paying jobs. As a member of the House Committee on International Relations and the fact that John F. Kennedy International Airport is the economic engine of my district, it is imperative that this body support USTR Ambassador Robert Portman's efforts to have a WTO dispute resolution panel put an end to the unfair subsidies to Airbus.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

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

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment, which I hope will cease the recent actions of the Department of Homeland Security's Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement to begin closing the only secure detention center in New York City for noncriminal foreign nationals who enter our country illegally. Closing this facility and releasing these individuals into the streets, as ICE is beginning to do, without conducting a proper screening, endangers the safety and security of New York City. The Queens detention facility has been utilized by ICE and its predecessor, INS, since 1989. Located within 4 miles of John F. Kennedy International Airport, the facility houses and processes detainees until their status can be determined. ICE oftentimes cannot properly classify a person as ``high risk'' or ``low risk'' at the initial questioning at John F. Kennedy Airport. Only after an investigation, while the individual is detained, can ICE determine whether the individual poses a threat. If it is determined that the entrant has criminal intent, they are transferred to a more secure facility for follow-up. For example, a co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing slipped through ICE's initial questioning at JFK and was subsequently identified by Queens detention facility personnel as a high-risk individual after they discovered bomb-making plans on this individual. Consequently, many high-risk individuals slip through the cracks initially and are only later identified as high-risk while they are in custody at the Queens detention facility. In a recent correspondence, my colleagues and I who represent New York City urged the director of ICE, who may become our city's next U.S. Attorney, to halt its efforts to close the only secure noncriminal detention facility in New York City. We know this is New York City now, but it could be where any noncriminal detention facility is in the United States tomorrow; and in this day and age in which we currently live in, we have got to make sure that we are sure that individuals who have entered illegally into this country, that we may have detained, we have got to dot every I and cross every T to make sure we rely on no one to slip through the process. So to just close what is happening at this facility now, right next to JFK in my district, to just close it in the manner in which they are closing it, just releasing people on the streets, at times we talk about how are you communicating with the individuals that are being released. It is simply by telephonic measures, not even by ankle bracelets or anything else. It endangers the entire population of New York; and I say if it is New York City today, it could be anywhere in the United States of America tomorrow. So I ask and urge my colleagues to support this amendment which will ensure that this essential facility which serves a vital role in New York City, as well as the country's first line of defense, remain open. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just say that what we are looking at right now, the situation where ICE is moving in my district, in this particular facility and the next clearly in the immigration pattern in New York is one where it is very high, coming through John F. Kennedy, which is the gateway to America, if you will. So when we have a facility like the facility that is currently in the district, to close it without any rationale or reason, then I think that we are defeating ourselves and defeating the security that is necessary to prevent people who enter this country illegally, some who could be very dangerous, from just walking the streets of the City of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I would like to recognize, first, Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank for their work to bring this overdue bill to the floor of the House. This is not the first time that this bill has passed through committee with broad bipartisan support, but hopefully this time we can work with the other body to make this law. The financial services industry is one of the driving engines of our economy, and the banking industry in particular is not only a key source of financing for consumer purchases like homes and cars or business purchases such as equipment and facilities. It is also the means by which the Federal Reserve implements monetary policy to stabilize our economy. Considering the vital role that banks, both big and small, play in our economy, it is equally important to make certain that the Federal insurance which backs these institutions is operating under the most efficient rules. H.R. 1185 will merge the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Association Insurance Fund into one strong fund. It will increase deposit insurance on individual accounts from $100,000 to $130,000, increases coverage on certain retirement accounts to $260,000, and increases coverage on in-state municipal deposits to $2 million. One of its most important aspects is that it provides for a 50 percent discount in the assessment rate for deposits attributable to lifeline deposit accounts, something, and I take my hat off to her, that the gentlewoman from the great State of California (Ms. Waters) has been working on for many, many years in support of people who are traditionally unbanked. Lastly, let me thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus) and the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley), who introduced the bill, and encourage Members from both sides of the aisle to vote ``yes'' on final passage.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, more needs to be done to address the ongoing global challenges of health, poverty, disease, and disasters so that we can end the inequities in foreign policy. Therefore, the CBC budget increases funding for these core development accounts with the overall goals of reducing poverty disparities and improving quality of life. There is $3.7 billion in the CBC budget for global AIDS, which is $500 million more than the President's budget. That is an increase of $900 million from last year and will support prevention, care and treatment for thousands more people. Foreign aid to Africa and the Caribbean is increased by $250 million in the Congressional Black Caucus budget to allow developing countries to participate in the global economy. These funds support strategic priorities in the Caribbean region, improve good governance and reduce corruption, increase economic growth and free trade and reduce narcotics trafficking. Public health and preventable illness initiatives is increased by $250 million in the CBC budget. More than one-third of the children in Africa are malnourished. In the last 10 years, approximately 2 million children have been killed in armed conflicts. africa Overall disparity--Nearly 1.3 billion people around the world live in poverty and do not have safe drinking water; more than one-third of the world's children are malnourished; within the last ten years, approximately two million children have been killed in armed conflicts, many after being forced to be child soldiers; many poor countries spend 30%-40% of their annual budgets on repaying their foreign-held debt (often more than they spend on health and education combined); and horrific conditions can lead individuals to become more disaffected and susceptible to recruitment by terrorist organizations. eradicating hunger, poverty, and diseases must be a priority HIV/AIDS Solution--AIDS is a global humanitarian disaster that demands robust leadership from the United States. According to the need based numbers advanced by UNAIDS, The Stop TB Partnership, and Roll back Malaria, we believe the US should provide $6.7 billion next year. And at least $1.5 billion in funding this year for the Global Fund to operate efficiently and effectively.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Emergency Supplemental Wartime Appropriations Act. It is unconscionable that the administration comes to Congress for another emergency supplemental when it has failed to account for previous emergency funding, and has failed to include the cost of the war in the FY '06 budget. How can this administration offer a budget that does not include funding for America's military operations overseas when we have more than 150,000 soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan for an indefinite period of time? Why does the administration continue to resort to supplemental funding to pay for this war instead of including the cost in the budget where it will sufficiently reflect the impact of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom on our deficit? Mr. Chairman, I did not support the Iraq supplemental request last year because I had serious concerns about no bid contracts in the bill. Unfortunately I was right to be concerned; just today it has been reported that Pentagon auditors have found excess billing for postwar fuel imports to Iraq by the Halliburton Company totaling more than $108 million. To add insult to injury Congress has not received any of the nine auditing reports from the Pentagon, but instead must resort to receiving this information through unofficial channels. Despite repeated requests, the administration has kept nine audits confidential from both Republican and Democratic Members of Congress. Accountability is a bipartisan issue. This $81 billion emergency supplemental funding request for the Department of Defense's Iraq and Afghanistan operations comes on the heels of $25 billion of emergency spending already appropriated for this year. Enacting this request would mean that this Congress will have provided this administration with almost $300 billion for military and reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is clear that this body is willing to live up to its end of the bargain and provide funding for our troops, but the administration is determined to continue to avoid serious questions and concerns about its spending. Let me state outright that I opposed going to war in Iraq, but that is not my reason for opposing this supplemental request. I oppose simply because we cannot allow continued deception by the administration on every aspect of our engagement with Iraq. We were deceived with exaggeration of Hussein's weapons capabilities, and now we are being deceived about the duration of the engagement and its exact cost--on the American purse and the loss of our men and women in uniform. We have exacerbated the situation in the Middle East and put our country in a more vulnerable position because of this war, and now we are asked to surrender the responsibilities of this body to hold the administration accountable for its actions. accountability Mr. Chairman as a Member of Congress I must provide answers to my constituents about the money that Congress spends. Accountability is not a partisan issue, we must all demand answers. Our Constitution was carefully crafted so as to allow a balance of power in our Government. Congress is obligated to use appropriations and the oversight that accompanies it as a means of holding the executive branch accountable for its spending of American funds. Any attempt to usurp that balance of power is a betrayal of the moral fiber of our Government and must be taken as an attack on the integrity of this body. The Department of Defense by law must submit reports to Congress with a detailed explanation of the spending and future costs of the Iraq war. These reports were due October of last year and at the beginning of this year. Despite this legal obligation clearly delineated in last year's Defense Appropriations Act, we have to date received no report accounting for the spending and detailing cost estimates of previous supplemental funding. Our Government should not fail to meet its legal responsibility without consequence. How can we justify more emergency appropriations without adequate assurance that what has already been appropriated has been shrewdly spent? Sadly, we have no report directly from DoD but the Inspector General reported that almost $9 billion in reconstruction funding has been mishandled and poorly accounted for. In fact, the Inspector General suggests that thousands of ``ghost employees'' were on an unidentified ministry payroll. In addition, DoD has stated in the past that 220,000 Iraq security forces had been trained and equipped, that number was then scaled down to 136,000. Moreover, the Pentagon has recently put into question if these troops are truly prepared for service. conclusion Mr. Chairman, opposition to this bill is not a vote against supporting our troops. This body has proven over and over again through appropriations that it supports our troops. Congress has appropriated $20 billion for Iraq reconstruction despite the administration's claims that Iraq reconstruction would cost between $1 and $2 billion and could be financed by Iraqi oil revenues. With enactment of this bill Congress will have appropriated $300 billion for the efforts in Iraq without proper accounting of the spending of these funds. The administration claimed that we would be received as great liberators and that just a few short months after the invasion we could start withdrawing troops, but instead we have no exit strategy and over 1,500 troops have died and thousands seriously injured. I could go on and on about the disastrous miscalculations and misleading estimates. This bill is critically lacking in accountability. No more blank checks for this administration.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 525.