Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his helpful and constructive amendment. I rise in support of this amendment. I had the opportunity to travel to these areas with the gentleman a few years back. Congress has recognized the debt owed to the Iraqis and Afghans who work at great personal risk in support of our troops. It has responded by creating two Special Immigrant Visa, SIV, programs. One is an SIV program for Iraqi and Afghani translators and interpreters. The second is an SIV program for Iraqi employers and contractors and their families, along with providing refugee resettlement benefits. However, as a 2008 report by the State Department Inspector General stated: the current process resulted in applicants' receiving SIVs who, one, did not meet the program's criteria of working primarily as interpreters or as translators or, two, in the OIG team's opinion, appeared to be outside the legislative intent of the program. As a result, the number of SIVs that could have been allocated to other qualified applicants were not. This amendment seeks to address a number of those issues by requiring our State Department, among other actions, to develop clear guidance on eligibility for adjudicators, to maintain a high level of vigilance due to the high risk of fraud and abuse, and many other items. I again thank the gentleman from Massachusetts. I urge my colleagues to support this vital and important amendment. With that, I yield back the balance of my time, Madam Chair.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I would be most honored to yield to our distinguished chairman.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, the Merida Initiative is an historic opportunity to cooperate with our democratic partners in the region against narcotrafficking and organized crime. Requiring comprehensive reporting on U.S. actions and the consequences of such are essential not only to ensuring oversight but also to ensuring our efforts are effective and, indeed, long lasting. Congresswoman Kirkpatrick's amendment works to include a review of the illegal southbound flow of cash under Merida reporting. I believe we should also oversee north in addition to southbound flows of cash across our borders. Only through a comprehensive approach and understanding of what we are facing can we truly be successful. I support the gentlewoman's amendment, and I congratulate her for offering it.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, although the amendment urges the executive branch to undertake assessments that, I hope, are already going into the administration's policymaking, I do not oppose this amendment. All of us are, of course, opposed to alien smuggling, trafficking persons and terrorists entering the United States. We believe that U.S. efforts to fight those grave problems should be cost effective. Thus, I support the amendment's call for a report on this subject. I yield back the balance of our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. The U.S.-Brazil Joint Action Plan to eliminate racial and ethnic discrimination and promote equality recognizes the commitment of our governments to promote equality and opportunity. It also underscores the importance of cooperating in the promotion of human rights in order to maintain an environment of peace, of democracy, and of prosperity in the region. The United States' commitment to freedom and equality is longstanding. This joint action plan between our two countries helps to further these values throughout the hemisphere. Mr. Meeks' amendment requires the Secretary of State to report on the progress of these important bilateral efforts under the action plan. This report will help to bring accountability and greater oversight to the objectives and to the goals of this important joint effort between the United States and Brazil. I thank Congressman Meeks for his introduction of this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, I rise to claim time in opposition.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition, even though I do not oppose the substance of the amendment.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, the amendment by the gentleman from Colorado has three main components, none of which I find inherently objectionable. Most significantly, it would require the State Department to report to Congress with a plan on providing appropriate career incentives for Foreign Service officers to serve in nonregional bureaus of the Department, such as the human rights and refugee-focused bureaus. And, secondly, it would clarify that some of the new public diplomacy efforts required by the underlying bill also should make use of the Internet for online research. And even while some question the fiscal wisdom of the underlying provisions, these changes do not exacerbate those flaws. I do not intend to oppose this amendment. I yield back.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in opposition even though I do not oppose the substance of the amendment.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Inglis), a member of our Foreign Affairs Committee.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Congressman Nadler's amendment, which, as he explained, expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should continue working with all former states of the Soviet Union to come to an agreement whereby each former state of the Soviet Union would pay the tens of thousands of beneficiaries who have emigrated to the United States the pensions for which they are eligible and entitled. Over the past several decades, many of the tens of thousands of immigrants who had come to the U.S. from these former Soviet Union states had earlier earned pensions working in their former home countries; however, most often they have been unable to collect what is owed to them. I support Congressman Nadler's amendment to work with the government of the former Soviet states to come to agreements whereby these states would pay the pensions to those entitled beneficiaries who have emigrated to the United States. It's the right thing to do. Further, Mr. Chairman, it would likely result in a lighter burden for U.S. taxpayers and the programs that their taxes fund to aid the elderly.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The prospect of an Iranian regime brandishing nuclear weapons is a nightmare scenario that we must stop if we are to avoid being forever threatened with destruction. But the problem, Mr. Chairman, is not confined to Iran. Following in its footsteps are countries such as Syria, whose clandestine nuclear weapons program is only now coming to light. We and our allies must use the means at our disposal to prevent these and other rogue regimes from realizing their deadly ambitions. We have an opportunity today to cut off an important source of assistance to the nuclear programs of Iran, Syria and other regimes, the help provided by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the very organization charged with preventing nuclear proliferation. The Government Accountability Office recently released a scathing report on the State Department's near total lack of oversight regarding the nuclear assistance that the IAEA provides to member states, especially to Iran, Syria, Cuba and Sudan. The GAO report noted that from 1997 to the year 2007, the International Atomic Energy Agency's Technical Cooperation Program provided over $55 million to these state sponsors of terrorism, supposedly for ``peaceful purposes.'' But as the GAO report notes, nuclear equipment, technology and expertise can be dual use, which means capable of serving a peaceful purpose, but also useful in contributing to nuclear weapons development. The GAO report criticizes offices at the State Department for having little or no idea what these programs actually consist of, much less working to stop the most harmful among them. Unfortunately, the bill before us contains no language that addresses this serious problem, despite its authorization of the administration's full request for over $100 million to be given to the IAEA. The bill before us does not mandate that the State Department take immediate action to implement the recommendations of the GAO. It does not require our representatives at this Agency to do anything to prevent additional nuclear assistance from going to Iran, from going to Syria, other enemies of the United States. It does not even mention the problem, Mr. Chairman. By contrast, an extensive section of H.R. 2475, an alternative Foreign Relations Authorization Act that I introduced earlier this year, was devoted to reform the United Nations, including addressing the specific problems of preventing the International Atomic Energy Agency nuclear assistance going to state sponsors of terrorism and countries in violation of their IAEA obligations. But none of that language was included in the bill that we are considering today. And that is why, Mr. Chairman, I'm offering this amendment. What would this amendment do? It would apply direct and unambiguous pressure on the International Atomic Energy Agency to halt its assistance to those countries of proliferation concern by withholding from the U.S. contribution almost $4.5 million. Why that amount? That is equal to the amount that the Agency spent on nuclear assistance to Iran, Syria, Cuba and Sudan in the year 2007, the most recent fiscal year for which figures are available. Opponents of my amendment may counter that denying funds to the IAEA for any purpose will weaken its nonproliferation efforts. But let me be clear, Mr. Chairman: this amendment does not affect safeguards or inspections. It is stunning to stand here and be forced to say that the International Atomic Energy Agency's technical nuclear assistance is adding to this threat; but it is, and we cannot let it continue. Unfortunately, we cannot expect the cooperation of this Agency, the IAEA, in fixing this problem because the Agency's attitude was summed up by a senior official who, when pressed to explain the continuing assistance to Iran and other state sponsors of terrorism, even as they defy the Agency and the U.N. Security Council, stated that ``there are no good countries and there are no bad countries.'' Faced with this extraordinary situation, Mr. Chairman, our only option is to use our financial leverage to force the International Atomic Energy Agency to stop helping our enemies' nuclear weapons programs. The threat that we face from Iran and the multiplying nuclear powers around the world grow every day. If we are to defend ourselves, we must use every leverage that we possess to stop this menace before it becomes a reality. My amendment is an opportunity to do just that. I ask my colleagues for their support. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), a member of our Foreign Affairs Committee. (Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, we seek to reserve at this time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition even though I do not oppose the substance of the amendment.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. If I could ask the chairman how much time I have left.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I continue to reserve.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I continue to reserve.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I continue to reserve.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the gentlelady from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore). Mr. Chairman, this amendment has a noble purpose, to draw attention to the potential erosion of the social and economic progress that has benefited women throughout Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban. Many of us in Congress have remained focused on key areas addressed in the Afghan National Development Strategy, the basis of the Afghanistan Compact, which are vital for building human capital and creating an enabling environment for promoting equal rights and opportunities for women in that country. We have also focused on ensuring the development and application of sustainable strategies that invest in Afghanistan's human capital, equipping both Afghani women and men with the skills, the support, and the resources needed to move their country forward into peace and stability. Furthermore, we have repeatedly expressed our commitment to Afghan political, economic and social development and promoting the participation of women and, indeed, all Afghans in these processes. I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.