Gregory Meeks

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to join my colleagues in expressing my strong concern regarding China's proposed Anti-Secession Law. This unilateral initiative by the People's Republic of China, PRC, is a very provocative move that could permanently destroy the balance in the Taiwan Strait. This proposed law, which will be voted on as early as March in the full Chinese National People's Congress, is more than just propaganda. The law assumes that China and Taiwan are now unified and that China has the rights to punish anyone expressing separatist sentiments or engaging in separatist activities. Ultimately, China can legally pursue unification of Taiwan by military force. Because I believe this will challenge the wishes of the 23 million people of Taiwan who have chosen a democratic system of governance, I sincerely urge Chinese leaders to abide by the wishes of the Taiwanese people and not adopt the Anti-Secession Law this March. I also urge the international community to join us in voicing their disapproval of this confrontational law.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, although I will not file an objection to the counting of Ohio's electoral votes, I rise today to acknowledge the voting discrepancies and irregularities that occurred in the State of Ohio in this past presidential election. As is evident in my colleague John Conyers's voting rights status report, Ohio has failed to provide the opportunity for its citizens to have equal access and opportunity to cast their vote and have that vote accurately counted. Many voters were denied provisional ballots and some eligible voters were improperly purged. Others were given erroneous information as to where and when they could vote. The State provided insufficient resources to minority precincts, resulting in long lines that caused delays up to 10 hours, forcing some voters to have to leave those lines to tend to personal obligations. There were rampant incidents of voter intimidation, deceptive phone calls and fraudulent fliers on official looking letterhead. The lack of a verifiable paper trail by some of the electronic voting machines contributed to a questionable vote count. Clearly, Ohio's election officials, including Secretary of State Blackwell, have questions to answer regarding these disturbing irregularities. How can we encourage free and fair elections in Iraq, a country that may soon become a fledgling democracy, when we can't ensure free and fair elections in America after 200 years of democracy. As a Member of Congress it is my duty to uphold the right of the people to have free and fair elections of their government officials. It is my hope that this Congress will work together in the coming months to enact real election reform that will restore America's confidence in the electoral process.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my condolences to the hundreds of thousands affected by the tsunami in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, Somalia, Malaysia, and other countries. December 26 will ever be a day etched in our memories and in our hearts as we struggle to comprehend the magnitude of loss associated with this disaster. Our great country is often viewed as a leader in the world and I know that the President will ensure that our country maintains this role by mobilizing the necessary humanitarian and economic assistance for both immediate and long-term relief, whether it be the $350 million already pledged or more as each day brings us a deeper understanding of the total impact of this disaster. We have long held prosperous relationships on economic and security issues with many of the countries that have been affected such as India and Malaysia. If we fail to adequately meet the needs of those affected by committing to advancing a strong recovery in both the Asian and African nations that have been affected, the long-term worldwide economic and political consequences of this natural disaster could be even more severe.

Mr. MEEKS

Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to commend my colleagues, Donald Payne and Tom Tancredo for working with the Senate to draft a bill that will hopefully be the beginning of the end of genocide in the Sudan. Since February 2003, Sudanese government troops and their allied militia, the Janjaweed, have raped, tortured, maimed, and burned entire villages to cleanse the Darfur areas of African Muslims. Seventy thousand have died. Over 200,000 have fled across the border into Chad and 1.6 million have been forced from their homes and into camps, where they remain vulnerable to attacks and lack basic services. While the Sudanese government has done little to protect its people, the African Union has shown tremendous leadership in trying to stop the atrocities. The African Union has led peace talks since August and sent hundreds of monitors and security forces to assist in stopping the atrocities. It is my hope that the bulk of the assistance included in this bill will go to ensure that the African Union is successful in its mission to finally end the genocide in Darfur! Additionally, we must continue to insist that the Sudanese government cease support for and disarm the Janjaweed militias by immediately utilizing sanctions against the government officials responsible for stopping the atrocities. Darfur has waited long enough. We must act now.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, since the tragic events of September 11, 2001, anxieties about airport security have increased. Most visible improvements and modifications--such as passenger screening--have already been done. Less visible improvements, particularly in terms of protecting airport perimeters against unauthorized entry, are lagging. A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that airport perimeter security has not appreciably improved in the past three years, despite persistent expressions of concern by Congress. The funds provided for these purposes have not been delivered to airports where they are needed. This report's title tells the whole story: ``Aviation Security: Further Steps Needed to Strengthen the Security of Commercial Airport Perimeters and Access Controls.'' In it, the GAO notes that ``through funding of a limited number security enhancements, TSA [the Transportation Security Agency] has helped to improve perimeter and access control security at some airports. However, at the time of our review, TSA had not yet developed a plan to prioritize expenditures to ensure that funds provided have the greatest impact in improving the security of the commercial airport system.'' The safety and security of our airports and air passengers are contingent on the priorities established by the TSA and other government agencies. Congress recognizes this, and in response to the terrorist attacks on our country, it established the Federal Airport Security Capital Fund to finance improvements at U.S. airports. This fund provides $250,000,000 a year to be parcelled out according to a legally-mandated formula by the Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Under Secretary for Borders and Transportation at the Department of Homeland Security. Despite this fund's existence, much remains to be done. In a ``report card'' published by the Airline Pilots Association, airport perimeter security in the United States was given an overall grade of ``D.'' Based on the judgment of those who have reason to know the situation best, a grade like this is shameful and unacceptable. Several key airports have been identified as having particular needs for expeditious improvements. These include the four airports administered by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Islip, JFK, LaGuardia, Newark); Chicago O'Hare; BWI; the airports in Allentown, Harrisburg, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Birmingham International Airport in Alabama. In recent months, it has been my privilege to consult with several private-sector experts on airport perimeter security. Dr. Walter Estulin, Philip Allen, and David Brownstein of the New York-based high- technology company, L-3 Communications, have taken time to explain to me how off-the-shelf technology can be used to protect our airports from intruders and infiltrators who can undermine the integrity of our air transportation system. Scientists and engineers from L-3 Communications have examined the problems faced by airports (and, by extension, seaports and inland harbors) and have developed technology that can go a long way toward meeting the security needs of transportation infrastructure. One issue of particular concern is the proliferation of MANPADS--``Man-Portable Air Defense Systems''--or, in a nutshell, shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles. In a GAO report published in May 2004, we learn that ``MANPADS pose a threat to commercial aircraft for several reasons. First, MANPADS are widely available. . . . The U.S. government estimates that a few thousand MANPADS are outside government controls. . . . Second, the characteristics of MANPADS--their lethality, portability, ease of use and concealment, and relatively low cost (from less than $1,000 to $100,000 each)--make them attractive to terrorists for acquisition and use against commercial aircraft. Third, MANPADS have been successfully used to attack and bring down aircraft.'' So far, luckily, none of these weapons have been used successfully within the United States. Still, in the ``report card'' from the Airline Pilots Association, defense against anti-aircraft missiles was given a grade of ``F.'' This is certainly a cause for concern. There are two actions we can take to address these matters. First, Congress should direct the Secretary of Transportation to better prioritize grants made under his authority under the Federal Airport Security Capital Fund. Second, we should pass legislation now under consideration, introduced by Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-West Virginia), John McCain (R-Arizona), and Ernest Hollings (D-South Carolina), called the ``Aviation Security Advancement Act'' (S. 2393). If passed, this bill would authorize $100,000,000 for the Department of Homeland Security ``for airport perimeter security technology, fencing, security contracts, vehicle tagging, and other perimeter security related operations, facilities, and equipment.'' This sum should be doubled. Surely $200,000,000 is a small price to pay to assure the safety and security of the millions of Americans who travel by air each year.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Menendez substitute to H.R. 10, the only version supported by the House's 9/11 Commission Caucus, the 9/11 families and the legislation most similar to the bill adopted by the Senate yesterday by a 96-2 vote. This bipartisan substitute fully implements the forty-one 9/11 Commission recommendations and adds no extraneous provisions. It implements critical recommendations not fully addressed by H.R. 10, including the creation of a strong National Intelligence Director and giving that director full budgetary and personal authority, as the 9/11 Commission recommends. The 9/11 Commission came together because America and the victims' families demanded answers and solutions. The bipartisan group of Commissioners--five Democrats and five Republicans--worked tirelessly to fulfill their commitment to make America safe. We should honor their efforts and fulfill our commitment to America by producing a bill that responds directly to the Commissions' recommendations--with no added controversial or unrelated provisions. The Menendez substitute helps us do just that by ensuring that we have a clean bill on the President's desk before we adjourn. Let's not play politics with a bill as important to the American people as this one. Pass the Menendez substitute.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to join with other Members of Congress in calling for humanitarian assistance to the Caribbean countries devastated by Hurricane Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jean. We all know that the southern United States and particularly Florida have been hurt badly by the worst series of hurricanes in decades and I pray for their continued strength and determination through these difficult times. But, even as we help Florida, Alabama, and other states here in the United States struggle to recover from the devastation inflicted by successive hurricanes, we cannot be indifferent to the destruction the hurricanes delivered to a number of our Caribbean neighbors. Ninety percent of the buildings on Grenada have been damaged. The Bahamas and Jamaica have been hit hard. The Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti have experienced flooding and mudslides. The hurricanes have robbed hundreds of people of their lives and tens of thousands of their livelihoods. Two-thirds of the population of Grenada have been left homeless and it is estimated that millions will be needed to rebuild. Death tolls in Haiti are at the 3,000 marker. While $50 million will begin to address the humanitarian and reconstruction needs, this is only a beginning. Hurricane Mitch in Honduras required $400 million. We can do at least as much for our neighbors.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, let me just say thanks to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) for the fine work that they have done in bringing this resolution to the floor. We are here to speak about, why is it that the world is not doing more to stop the Sudanese Government troops and their allied military, the Janjaweed? Together, they have raped, tortured, maimed and burned entire villages to cleanse the area of African Muslims resulting in close to 50,000 deaths. Another 1.5 million persons have been forced from their homes into camps where they remain vulnerable to attacks by the Janjaweed, who are among the police guarding the camps. The world cannot continue to condone this genocide. We can also not continue to condone the presence of human rights abusers on a commission that is charged with protecting human rights because it is ridiculous and unconscionable to think that the very perpetrator of a genocide could also be the enforcer of human rights. But that is exactly what is happening by allowing Sudan to continue to serve on the United Nations Human Rights Commission. That is why I stand behind this bill to suspend the Sudan from the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and for the U.N. to launch a formal inquiry into its acts of genocide in Sudan. Let us hope the world will begin to work harder to end the atrocities by, first, suspending Sudan from a commission it fails to respect, and second, by standing behind the efforts of the African Union to stop these atrocities. We are here today to simply speak about why it is that the world is not doing more to stop Sudanese government troops and their allied militia, the Janjaweed. Together they have raped, tortured, maimed, and burned entire villages to cleanse African Muslims from the area-- resulting in close to 50,000 deaths. Another 1.5 million persons have been forced from their homes and into camps, where they remain vulnerable to attacks by the Janjaweed, who have been hired as police to guard the camps. The world cannot continue to condone this genocide. We can also not continue to condone the presence of human rights abusers on a Commission that is charged with protecting Human Rights. It is simply unconscionable to think that the very perpetrators of genocide could also be the enforcers of human rights. But that is exactly what is happening by allowing Sudan to continue to serve on the United Nations Human Rights Commission. Numerous reports provide evidence of the Sudanese government's involvement in actively committing atrocities in Darfur. However, the Sudanese government continues to deny any connection to the atrocities carried out by the Janjaweed and simultaneously, has done little to stop them. By insisting that no genocide is taking place and repeatedly denying any responsibility for protecting their own people, the Sudanese government has demonstrated that it is not fit to serve on the United Nations Human Rights Commission. What is needed now is action from the international community. First, Sudan's membership on the United Nations Human Rights Commission must be suspended. The universal declaration on human rights states that, ``everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person'' and that no ``state, group or person has any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms.'' The Sudanese government, through its involvement in perpetrating the genocide in Darfur, and its inaction in doing anything to resolve the humanitarian crisis, is in violation of the basic principles of the United Nations Human Rights Commission. It, therefore, cannot remain a member. Second, the international community must offer increased support to the African Union, which has been a leader in attempting to resolve the conflict in Sudan. In addition to leading peace talks, the African Union has led a small contingency of troops to Darfur to monitor the cease-fire and serve as observers. The African Union must be congratulated on these efforts. Additionally, support for their efforts must be increased. It is essential that the African Union's force be enlarged and allotted a robust mandate to protect Darfur's civilians from new attacks. We can no longer sit on the sidelines and pretend that nothing is going on while the Sudanese government commits crime after crime against humanity. Murder, rape, forced displacement--these are clearly not the tools of human rights supporters. That is why I stand behind this bill to suspend Sudan from the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and for the U.N. to launch a formal inquiry into the acts of genocide in Sudan.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong support of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to commend our colleague, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), for introducing this timely and important resolution, along with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler), who serves as cochair of the Indonesia Caucus along with the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton). The resolution before the House condemns the September 9 terrorist attack outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia. Nine Indonesians lost their lives in this brutal attack, and almost 200 people were injured. This latest attack by Jemaah Islamiah sadly confirms Indonesia's status as a frontline state in the global battle against terrorism. Over 200 young people, mostly Australian, were murdered in the 2002 Bali bombings. Twelve Indonesians were also killed at the suicide bombing at the J.W. Marriott hotel in Jakarta in August 2003. While this latest attack occurred on Indonesian soil and those killed were Indonesians, the attack itself was aimed at Australia and its people. However, these cowardly terrorist acts will not prevent Australia from standing strong against terrorism or from continuing to support the spread of democracy and freedom around the world. Neither will these attacks be successful in changing the path of Indonesia, who has just held peaceful, democratic elections in testament to its moderate character. The United States must continue to play a leadership role in developing an international coalition that works closely with ASEAN countries to help develop strong partnerships that will help prevent future terrorist attacks. I would like to convey to the Indonesian people my heartfelt sympathies for the innocent loss of life on September 9 and my appreciation to the Australians for their willingness to confront international terrorism at every turn. I strongly support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

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. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to thank the gentleman for his statement. The question of the stadium is something we will deal with, but we are all together in that we want the Olympics in 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. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong support of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to commend my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), on the other side. As he said, we may not agree on much, but we do agree on New York being the best place for this. I also would like to commend my friend and colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), for introducing this important resolution. His leadership on behalf of the interests of New York City is greatly appreciated. Mr. Speaker, the 2004 Olympic games in Athens recently unfolded before the eyes of hundreds of millions of people around the world, some watching in person but many more on television every night. It is fair to say, Mr. Speaker, that the Athens Games were an unqualified success. Despite fears of terrorism or that key Olympic venues would not be ready, Athens was more than prepared to receive over 16,000 athletes and officials from around the world, and the Olympic spirit thrived as athletes lived out their dreams. This resolution before the House seeks to bring that Olympic spirit we witnessed in Athens here to America for the first time since 1996, when they were held in Atlanta. This measure urges the International Olympic Committee to choose the entry of the United States, New York City, to host the 2012 Summer Olympics. Mr. Speaker, the Olympics brings together people from all over the world, and when they arrive in the city so great they had to name it twice, New York, New York, they will find that virtually every nationality that competes in the Olympic Games is represented among the people of New York City. Of the 202 countries that participated in the Athens Olympics, immigrant children of 199 of them attend New York City schools. Even the smallest Nation attending Olympic Games in New York will find their own cheering section. New York City already has a developed transportation infrastructure to ensure that athletes and spectators can easily get to all Olympic venues and practice facilities. The Olympic village will also be centrally located, and over 500 acres of parks will be created or improved. New York has detailed plans to first-class sports facilities throughout the city to host the Olympics in an effort that will help to revitalize New York's waterfront. While the Olympics will have an economic impact of over $11 billion and will create over 135,000 jobs, they will have a longer-term impact upon the blueprint of the city and its ability to host international sporting events for decades to come. Mr. Speaker, New York is blessed with some of the best financial, creative, marketing and corporate resources in the world. New York is committed to applying these talents to creating the best Games in the history of the Olympics. When the International Olympic Committee meets next July to choose the site of the 2012 Summer Games, I urge committee members to choose New York City, the Empire State. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), my friend and colleague.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I come before you today to honor a man that has given much to my district and asked for very little. Former City Council Member Archie Spigner is considered the Godfather of African American politics in my district in southeast Queens. A mentor to many of our current successful leaders, Archie held his seat from 1974 until term limits ended his service in the New York City Council in 2001. As a member of the City Council, Archie rose to the post of Deputy Majority Leader--the second highest position in the Council. HIs legislative responsibilities included Chairmanships of the Committees on Housing and Buildings, Economic Development and the Legislative Office of Budget Review. He also served on the Council's Budget Negotiating Team and acted as liaison for the Council's 14 member Queens delegation. He was elected to and served on the advisory board of the National League of Cities, an advocacy group for our Nation's urban areas. As District Leader and Executive Member of the Guy R. Brewer United Democratic Club, he was instrumental in electing Queens' first African- American Supreme Court Justice, the first African-American Assembly Member, the first African-American State Senator, and the first African-American Member of Congress. He played a pivotal role the mayoral campaigns of David N. Dinkins and Percy Sutton, as well as the gubernatorial campaign of H. Carl McCall. Archie helped elect my precedessor to Congress, and of course, provided indispensable support and counsel when I sought this office. A post office facility bearing Archie's name, located a few blocks from the headquarters from which Archie's political organizing emanated will be a reminder to the community he served long and well of the gratitude they owe to this man who made a difference in their everyday lives and effectively represented them in the corridors of New York City government. Please join me in designating the Saint Albans postal facility the Archie Spigner Post Office Building, in honor of this accomplished gentleman.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, this weekend we pause to remember the third anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. We pause to recollect the full meaning of the lives lost--nearly 3,000 Americans and foreign nationals. Our compatriots were not just casualty figures. They were mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters. They were best friends and good neighborhoods. They were lovers and loved ones. They were employers and employees. Their best contributions were still ahead of them. We pause to recall the first responders who rescued thousands from the twin towers. We recall with amazement their bravery as they went into the towering infernos. And we recall that had it not been for heroic action of passengers abroad Flight 93, al Qaeda's terrorists might have crashed that airliner into the White House or the Capitol Building instead of a field in rural Pennsylvania. On this third anniversary of 9/11, we also pause to reaffirm our determination to triumph over fear. We reaffirm our determination to foster tolerance in our land and in the world, to build respect for all faiths, and to promote the collaborative action of people and governments across the globe, to mobilize for mutual development rather the civilizational destruction advocated by Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and other adherents of radical Islamist fundamentalism. On this day and this occasion, our thoughts turn to the survivors of 9/11 and the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks. It is impossible to calculate their enduring pain. Yet, we are inspired by how these families have turned their tragedy into effective action. Their dedication to the memory of loves ones lost led to the creation of the 9/11 commission, which in turn led to a set of recommendations for intelligence and homeland security reform that if implemented could better protect our nation, make us for secure, and positioned to share peace and prosperity with the world. As a country, we must be as determined as the 9/11 families. We must be as determined now as we were on 9/11 to bring to justice the perpetrators of this colossal assault on human decency. But, mindful of all that has transpired since then--on the one hand a just but unfinished war in Afghanistan, on the other hand a disastrous diversion and unparalleled miscalculation in Iraq--we must proceed in meeting the al Qaeda challenge with wise leadership, with patience and persistence, with global allies, with sound plans, with focused effort. Most of all, we must proceed together as Americans. We must reclaim the unity of purpose that gripped all of us on 9/11. I remember well utter destruction that took place on that beautiful September morning. But, I remember even better how every New Yorker, every American-- Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Arabs, Jews, gentiles, and Muslims, rich and poor--came together as one. We must reclaim that spirit and that purpose. We must overcome those among us who have distracted us by using our suffering as a nation for narrow and selfish political gain or have diverted resources, personnel, time, and energy from the struggle against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. We must regain the momentum and solidarity befitting a great people and a great nation focused on accomplishing great deeds of remembrance for the victims of 9/11.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to denounce Vice President Cheney's disgusting and inappropriate remarks yesterday while campaigning. The Vice President's consistent attacks have reached an all-time low, even for him, and that is saying a lot for the most polarizing, divisive Vice President in the history of the United States. We were not attacked because we were Democrats. We were not attacked because we were Republicans. We were attacked because we were Americans, and the question is where is this administration leading us? Mr. Cheney criticizes Mr. Kerry while he was defending this country, and he took five deferments. To exploit 9/11 and play on the public fears of terrorism is an affirmation by this administration that their record is too dismal to stand on its own. Americans should be fearful, fearful of the Bush- Cheney policies that have recruited more terrorists who want to destroy us, fearful that the hatred for America is at an all-time high, thanks to the policies of Bush-Cheney. Time and time again this administration has made the wrong choices for America. John Kerry and John Edwards will take America in a new direction. He will make America stronger at home and more respected around the world.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, this week, the world marked the 30th anniversary of Turkey's invasion of Cyprus. And so began three decades of Turkey's illegal military occupation of Cyprus. Even as we speak, Turkey maintains 30,000 heavily armed troops in the occupied portions of Cyprus. For 30 years, Cyprus has been divided by a green line--a 113 mile barbed wire barrier that runs across the width of the island. For 30 years, Greek Cypriots have experienced 30 years of ethnic cleansing, forcible evictions, and missing persons. Cyprus has endured 30 years of the flouting of its territorial integrity. This includes the occupation authority's attempt to create an independent ``Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.'' The international community has witnessed 30 years of the flagrant violation of U.N. General Assembly resolutions and Security Council decisions calling for immediate withdrawal of all foreign forces from Cyprus, the return of refugees, and respect for the island's sovereignty. Thirty years is a long time. The occupation of Cyprus has been going on too long. If left to their own wisdom and devices, with firm international support, Greek and Turkish Cypriots could find ways to live in peace and harmony. The international community can and must play an indispensable role in settling the Cyprus dispute. But, to do this, it must draw the proper conclusions from results of the vote this past April on the reunification plan put forward by the United Nations. Seventy six percent of the Greek Cypriot electorate opposed the ``Annan Plan'' because of concerns about security, property restitution, and the structure of the proposed central government, while 65 percent of Turkish Cypriot voters supported it. It is clear from this experience that a workable solution must take the interests and concerns of both the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities fully into account. It is instructive that the split vote has not led to greater tension between the two communities or between Greece and Turkey. During most of the 433 year history of Cyprus, Greek and Turkish Cypriots have coexisted peacefully. With the notable exception of the period that immediately followed Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Greek and Turkish Cypriot relations have largely been free of inter-communal violence. The hotly debated referendum itself took place overwhelmingly with an absence of conflict. This shows that despite the differences between them, Greek and Turkish Cypriots overwhelmingly share a desire for peace. The leadership of the Republic of Cyprus seeks a bizonal, bicommunal federation under a plan that promotes the genuine reunification of Cypriots and Cypriot society, while enabling each community to retain its own identity and culture. Cyprus's admission to the European Union on May 1st of this year may have created a new opportunity for resolving the division and occupation with an inclusive democratic system in which human rights are fully respected and the fundamental freedoms on which the European Union is founded, are guaranteed. Taking all of this into account, the U.N. needs to go back to the drawing board. The United States needs to remain an honest broker. It must not attempt to impose a solution that the overwhelming majority of Greek-Cypriots reject. To do so will make an ultimate solution and final reunification difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. America must at all times remember that a united, peaceful, and prosperous Cyprus is in our national interest and the interest of world peace. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Cyprus was one of the first nations to express its solidarity with the United States. Cyprus has also been a strong ally in the war against terrorism. We must continue to support our friends, who like us, only seek to live in peace.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, only a few-months ago the world honored the tenth anniversary of the Rwandan genocide and promised never to tolerate genocide again. 10 years later we are witnessing another genocide, but this time in the Sudan. Since the conflict erupted in February 2003, thirty thousand have died and close to a quarter of a million will die, if we do not act. Sudanese government troops and their allied militia, the Janjaweed, have raped, tortured, maimed, and burned entire villages to cleanse the area of African Muslims. An estimated 1.2 million have been forced from their homes and into camps, where they remain vulnerable to attacks and lack basic services. We must stop what is happening. It is Genocide, and under the requirements of the 1948 UN Convention, the world is obligated to act to stop it. We must insist that the Sudanese government cease support for and disarm the Janjaweed militias and if it cannot, the UN Security Council must be persuaded to authorize force to do so. The U.S. and world must target sanctions such as travel bans and the freezing of assets of Khartoum government officials responsible to stop the atrocities. We must find out why humanitarian aid is not getting through and ensure that it does. Lastly, we must establish a Darfur Resettlement, Rehabilitation, and Reconstruction Fund so that those driven off their land may return and begin to rebuild their communities. We must act now, if we are to prevent another Rwanda.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Passage of this agreement stands to greatly benefit the United States of America, which enjoys a consistent yearly trade surplus with Morocco, totaling over $1.5 billion from 1992 to 2003. This agreement is a high-standard, comprehensive one that will eliminate tariff and nontariff barriers to trade. In fact, the agreement represents the best industrial and consumer goods market access package of any U.S. FTA with a developing nation. The agreement also levels the playing field for U.S. businesses, farmers, and workers vis-a-vis European competitors, who have for far too long enjoyed a competitive advantage over the United States suppliers of goods, services, and agricultural products. The agreement will also serve as a key building block toward the establishment of a broader Middle East free trade area. Through this FTA, Morocco also sets an important example throughout the developing world of the benefits of trade liberalization and strategic importance of high-standard rules that should govern trade. In this respect, the FTA includes the best of intellectual property rights protections negotiated to date by the United States. In addition, the Moroccan government has used the FTA negotiating process to strengthen its own laws, particularly with respect to the status of women and labor rights, two measures which distinguish Morocco from many of its Arab neighbors. Finally, this FTA is historic. It is a historic milestone in the United States and Morocco bilateral relationship, which began well over 200 years ago, where Morocco was the first country to recognize the newly independent United States of America. Morocco today remains one of the United States' closest political allies in the war against terror and a steadfast friend in advancing peace in the Middle East. And it is for these reasons I urge all of my colleagues to support the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement. This is a solid agreement that promotes our commercial interests and contains important provisions on agriculture, labor, and intellectual property.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, this week, the world marked the 30th anniversary of Turkey's invasion of Cyprus. And so began three decades of Turkey's illegal military occupation of Cyprus. Even as we speak, Turkey maintains 30,000 heavily armed troops in the occupied portions of Cyprus. For 30 years, Cyprus has been divided by a green line--a 113 mile barbed wire barrier that runs across the width of the island. For 30 years, Greek Cypriots have experienced 30 years of ethnic cleansing, forcible evictions, and missing persons. Cyprus has endured 30 years of the flouting of its territorial integrity. This includes the occupation authority's attempt to create an independent ``Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.'' The international community has witnessed 30 years of the flagrant violation of U.N. General Assembly resolutions and Security Council decisions calling for immediate withdrawal of all foreign forces from Cyprus, the return of refugees, and respect for the island's sovereignty. Thirty years is a long time. The occupation of Cyprus has been going on too long. If left to their own wisdom and devices, with firm international support, Greek and Turkish Cypriots could find ways to live in peace and harmony. The international community can and must play an indispensable role in settling the Cyprus dispute. But, to do this, it must draw the proper conclusions from results of the vote this past April on the reunification plan put forward by the United Nations. Seventy six percent of the Greek Cypriot electorate opposed the ``Annan Plan'' because of concerns about security, property restitution, and the structure of the proposed central government, while 65 percent of Turkish Cypriot voters supported it. It is clear from this experience that a workable solution must take the interests and concerns of both the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities fully into account. It is instructive that the split vote has not led to greater tension between the two communities or between Greece and Turkey. During most of the 433 year history of Cyprus, Greek and Turkish Cypriots have coexisted peacefully. With the notable exception of the period that immediately followed Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Greek and Turkish Cypriot relations have largely been free of inter-communal violence. The hotly debated referendum itself took place overwhelmingly with an absence of conflict. This shows that despite the differences between them, Greek and Turkish Cypriots overwhelmingly share a desire for peace. The leadership of the Republic of Cyprus seeks a bizonal, bicommunal federation under a plan that promotes the genuine reunification of Cypriots and Cypriot society, while enabling each community to retain its own identity and culture. Cyprus's admission to the European Union on May 1st of this year may have created a new opportunity for resolving the division and occupation with an inclusive democratic system in which human rights are fully respected and the fundamental freedoms on which the European Union is founded, are guaranteed. Taking all of this into account, the U.N. needs to go back to the drawing board. The U.S. needs to remain an honest broker. It must not attempt to impose a solution that the overwhelming majority of Greek- Cypriots reject. To do so will make an ultimate solution and final reunification difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. America must at all times remember that a united, peaceful, and prosperous Cyprus is in our national interest and the interest of world peace. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Cyprus was one of the first nations to express its solidarity with the United States. Cyprus has also been a strong ally in the war against terrorism. We must continue to support our friends, who like us, only seek to live in peace.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and in support of the Stock Option Accounting Reform Act. This bipartisan legislation has widespread support on both sides of the aisle. This bill is all about maintaining the leadership role of the United States in emerging industries such as high technology and biotechnology and by recruiting and sustaining the best available workforce. This bill is about giving employees an incentive to be the best that they can be and encouraging small companies, not stifling them. Mr. Speaker, this legislation ensures that the rank-and-file employees who have benefited from broad-based stock option plans in the past can continue to reap these benefits in the future. Broad-based employee stock option plans benefit middle-class and younger workers who have taken a chance on smaller companies right out of school with the opportunity and promise to grow with that company and share in its success professionally and financially. In my congressional district, companies such as American Airlines, Verizon, Time Warner and Jet Blue are just a few of the companies that provide stock options as a benefit to their employees. And throughout this debate, some have claimed that stock option benefits only benefit senior corporate executives. The facts say otherwise; 14.6 million American workers held stock options in 2002, representing 13 percent of private sector workers nationwide. Eighty-five percent of stock options are held by nonmanagement workers, and one out of eight employee option-holders is either a union member or married to someone who is. And 39 percent of the employees earning stock options earn only $30,000 to $75,000 a year. Meanwhile, this bill is also about combating abuse in executive compensation. The bill immediately requires the expensing of all stock options given to the top five executives of a company, but exempts small companies from this requirement for 3 years so that they do not get penalized disproportionately, a balanced and fair compromise. There are undoubtedly reservations about having Congress enact accounting laws, and I share these reservations and counsel that we should be prudent in our approach. However, the granting of stock options to certain employees in the early and growth stages of a company, particularly in a technological industry, has been a critical component and the success of many technological companies and technological innovations that many Americans utilize, including the devices we carry around with us in the House. Mr. Speaker, this is bipartisan legislation which reflects the kinds of issues that this Congress needs to address to jump-start our economy with quality jobs for all of American workers. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this bill.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4759, the U.S.-Australia FTA. This agreement is the most commercially significant bilateral trade agreement outside of North America that the United States has entered into. It also addresses several issues that we have concerns about dealing with labor, the environment, and human rights. Because of the strength and the size of Australia, we can deal and talk about rights that are respective for all. Plus, for example, in the automotive sector, free trade between the United States and Australia will allow greater trade opportunities in auto products between our two countries. U.S. auto makers produce over 70 percent of all passenger vehicles made in Australia. Other industries also benefit from this agreement: telecommunications, financial services, and our technological firms, with greater intellectual property protections. Abroad, this agreement provides Australia with an opportunity to facilitate a higher quality of health care for its people. Though Australia has recognized the significant role played by innovative U.S. pharmaceutical companies in delivering high-quality health care, the problem of pharmaceutical price controls is still an issue. It is important that future trade negotiations more closely examine the possible impact of unfair trade practices that are shifting the cost of pharmaceutical research and development just simply to the American consumer. Mr. Speaker, this is a momentous agreement and is worthy of strong support from this body, for this is not just a free trade agreement, it is indeed, in every sense of the word, a fair trade agreement.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, a description of the Bush administration record of the last 3\1/4\ years is something like this: Not fully funding No Child Left Behind, unintelligent. Not providing a real benefit to seniors for prescription drug purposes, shameful. Not putting forth a real solution to significantly decrease the 44 million uninsured, bad medicine. Weapons of mass destruction, a lie. No-bid contracts for the Vice President's former company Halliburton, scandalous. Revealing the name of a covert CIA operative, traitorous. The Abu Ghraib fiasco, passing the buck. The management of the Iraq War, bumbling. The promise of no nation-building, forgotten. Being a uniter as opposed to a divider, hilarious. The promise of a less arrogant foreign policy, you have got to be kidding me.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning wondering where is the Commander in Chief? Our wartime President is missing in action. Our troops are being killed because of a lack of proper planning; and as one of the worst scandals involving our military is uncovered, George W. Bush is in Ohio flipping pancakes, and in Michigan, of all places, riding in a $1 million bus made in Canada. Where is our leadership from our President? It is AWOL. As the Bush campaign smear machine continues to attack and distort John Kerry's decorated Vietnam service record, which includes a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts, George Bush wants the American people to believe that he actually has a military record to be proud of. That is as believable as when the Commander in Chief landed on the deck of an aircraft carrier pretending to be a soldier. Perhaps the President's smear machine can explain where George Bush was the year he was missing during his military service, and his clear absence of leadership as a President, instead of cooking up phoney attacks on a decorated war hero like John Kerry.

Mr. MEEKS of New York

Mr. MEEKS of New York. I felt compelled to join. I wish I was part of the 30-Something Club. I just joined the 50-Something Club. But just sitting here listening, I want to compliment those who are members of the 30-Something Club because America really is dependent upon you. Therefore, it becomes important for those of us in Congress to make sure that life is better for our children than it was for us. Now, I sit here as a Member of Congress, as the gentleman indicated. I have three daughters, two of whom are in college. As the gentleman said, they are going to be all right. But their father can relate to what you are talking about, because I come from a very poor home. I grew up in public housing, and my parents understood that in order for my family to be better that education was the key. But they could not afford it, so when it was time for me to go to college, the only solution for me was to take out school loans. Guess what? Even that was not enough. So my parents, my father, took a second job, my mother went back to work, and they had to borrow personal money themselves. Now, the point I am trying to make is that then when I graduated, I went on and was one of those guys that was ambitious. It was not only 4 years of undergraduate school, but, as some people know today, you do not stop simply with a BA necessarily. But if you want to go on to do other things, if you want to go to graduate school, in my case it was law school, there was an additional 3 years of student loans that I had to take and sacrifice that my parents had to make. So when I was able to leave school and took a prominent job as an assistant district attorney, when you look at the salary that I was making, equal to my companion, one would think, but I had these tremendous school loans that I had to pay back. So while they could go on and live in a decent apartment, I had to go back to live with my parents, for two reasons: number one, I had to pay my loans; number two, I had to help them pay for their loans that they took out for my education. So for the first almost 7 years of my adult life working as a prosecutor I was still living at home, simply because of economics, simply because I had to help myself and at the same time help my parents who made the kind of sacrifices they made. We should do better than that in Congress. We should not want to continue that burden or give an extra burden to our young people. We are, in fact, the richest country on the planet; and then we give tax cuts just to the richest 1 or 2 percent of Americans and say to our young people, we are not going to think about you. Or we know, as the gentleman said, that we are $7.1 trillion in debt, and guess what? Those of us who are 50-something, we are not really going to have to pay it. We are going to leave those burdens to you guys who are 30- something and 20-something. So you are going to inherit the debt. But on top of the debt, you are going to inherit from this country, we are going to pile on school loans, so you can never get out of it. Or are we trying to set up a system where you have an elitist class, where only the top 1 or 2 percent can afford to send their kids to college? Why? They will not have to take out any school loans, because their parents are able to afford it and pay for it all. So this work becomes important, what you are doing. I take my hat off to our leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), for what she is doing; and I take my hat off to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek), and to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez), who was here, because they are leading America, and America only changes when young people move. That is why I hope people get into these Members' e-mail and start e- mailing and commenting and giving some comments, because to me the future of America lies only with the young people; and we need these people and their involvement and their ideas. I will tell you as an older individual who just entered the 50- Something Club that you will have an ally in me and many others in this Democratic conference, particularly, that will push to make sure that your America is a better America for all than it is today.

Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Speaker, that has a lot of residual effect, actually, just on that, particularly for somebody who may come from a very poor neighborhood. Because what happens with a lot of those summer jobs, I am again being one of them and I could talk about some of my constituents, et cetera, they get exposed to different things they may never be exposed to by that summer job, and that summer job gives them the motivation to continue to go to school to do something. But one of the other things I wanted to say that the gentleman from Ohio indicated which is very important, which I think that a lot of those of us who are, especially the 60-somethings and the 70-somethings now, should have institutional memory, because the gentleman from Ohio touched upon the fact that when they went to school on the GI Bill, et cetera, that they were able to become doctors and lawyers and accountants, et cetera. Well, let us take New York State, for example. Many of them back then had nothing to pay for school. Because if you went to the City University of New York or the State University in New York, tuition was free. That is what made us progress so quickly from the 1940s to the 1960s, because we began and understood the importance in investing in education of our young people and we made higher education in public institutions free. And now, the gentleman gave the statistics or the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez) gave the statistics earlier on, how every year the percentage on tuition rates are going up in our public institutions, and we will not have any money to help subsidize our public institutions. Why? Because we are $7.1 trillion in debt. So, therefore, we cannot help anybody who cannot do anything, because there is not going to be any money.