Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If I could point out that the most recent reincarnation of this very same issue was passed earlier this year in this very House, and I would like to read verbatim what it said. I was proud to vote for it, and I will vote for it. Sec. 1222. Continuation of prohibition on establishment of permanent military installations in Iraq or United States control over oil resources of Iraq. Section 1519 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2444) is amended by inserting after ``this Act'' the following: ``or any other Act for any fiscal year''. Mr. Speaker, with that I am pleased to yield with great pleasure such time as he may consume to a great American, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), who has also voted for this measure six times.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on International Operations.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, were we seen as occupiers in Haiti, in Bosnia? Do we not, as some have said on Iraq, have a sustained military presence in these countries? Did we not intervene in Haiti to restore democracy and remain to prevent the increased violence? In fact, as our distinguished Speaker, whom we'll be hearing from in just a few moments, when she argued for a sustained U.S. deployment in Bosnia, Speaker Pelosi said, Is the Bosnian mission without danger and risk? No. With strong leadership there are always risks. These risks have been minimized. They are risks for peace, risks for ending years of bloodshed, risks for freedom. We risk far more by failing to act. We risk far more if we allow the tenuous peace to collapse and watch the flames of war ignite again. I agreed with Speaker Pelosi then when she said that on December 13 of 1995, and I agreed with her when she said on September 19 of 1994, when advocating for a sustained U.S. presence in Haiti, the Speaker said, setting a date certain for troop withdrawal will unnecessarily endanger both our troops on the ground and our efforts at promoting democracy in Haiti. I say that we have no less at stake here in Iraq. The bill before us, as we have said before, is a fine bill. We support what it seeks to do because, in fact, it is law. It is already United States law. We want to make sure that the Iraqi people have the same level of commitment that we have shown to other oppressed people throughout the world. We should not ignore the consequences of a rapid withdrawal from Iraq in a vitally important region of the world. But, like I have said, this is not the issue addressed in this bill. Some have remarked about the greater issue of Iraq in their discourse today. On the bill before us, it is already public law. We have passed it six times in the House. It has been law three times, and we have no objection to the bill becoming law a fourth time, a fifth time or a sixth time. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 378 introduced by my good friend and colleague from Puerto Rico (Mr. Fortuno). This resolution commends the humanitarian efforts of Red Cross, Red Crescent and Magen David Adom societies worldwide on the occasion of World Red Cross Red Crescent Day. These organizations and their 97 million volunteers worldwide make invaluable contributions every day. They provide relief and humanitarian assistance to the world's most vulnerable people, alleviating the suffering of citizens afflicted by war, natural disasters and other crises. More than 233 million people worldwide received assistance from Red Cross, Red Crescent and Magen David Adom societies each year. When a tsunami hit southeast Asia in 2005, those societies were there. When hundreds of millions of children require vaccination against measles and others diseases, those societies are there. When the need arises in the future for humanitarian aid and relief, those societies will be there. As a Member of Congress from Florida's 18th District, I have witnessed firsthand the good works of the Red Cross throughout its efforts to help the victims of numerous hurricanes and tropical storms that have afflicted the residents of south Florida. I have also witnessed firsthand, in my numerous trips to Israel, the relief work and the humanitarian assistance that the Magen David Adom has provided to so many, including, tragically, the many innocent victims of terror. Therefore, I am particularly pleased that in 2006, in a long overdue development, the International Committee of the Red Cross officially recognized Magen David Adom as Israel's national aid society. With much appreciation for the good work of Red Cross, Red Crescent and Magen David Adom societies everywhere, I urge the House to adopt House Resolution 378, introduced by my good friend, Mr. Fortuno.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to thank my colleague from California, Ambassador Watson, for introducing this important resolution, House Resolution 294, which commends the Kingdom of Lesotho for enacting a law to improve the legal status of married women. Historically, a married woman in this African country was considered a minor under the law, and, as such, was unable to enter into contracts without her husband's consent and was severely restricted in economic activities and had no legal standing in the courts. This was the case, despite that women have traditionally borne a disproportionate share of responsibility for the health, the welfare, and the education of the family in Lesotho. They are in the fields, in the markets, in the classrooms, and in the clinics. They run the home and provide the food, care and education essential for the survival of their families. Women serve as the backbone of society in Lesotho. Yet under the law, they have been considered only half a person. Obviously, this was a grave social injustice that required remedy. I commend those in the government and in civil society who began pressing for greater gender equality in Lesotho as early as 1992. But it is important to realize that gender inequality in Lesotho, and throughout Africa, is not just an issue of human rights. This is a development issue and an issue of national security. Over half of the population lives below the poverty level. Yet a government cannot responsibly expect to lift its people out of poverty while legally excluding half of the most productive segment of society from the economy. Further, at 29 percent, Lesotho has one of the highest HIV prevalence rates in the world. Life expectancy already has plummeted to 36 years, and prevalence rates are expected to climb to a staggering 36 percent in the next 15 years. The HIV pandemic is obliterating a generation of the most productive people in Africa. In South Africa, for example, factory managers routinely complain that they have to hire two people to fill a single position due to absentee rates related to HIV. When a man dies, who is left to provide for his family? His wife. But if a wife and a mother cannot secure even basic inheritance rights and has no standing in civil court, then how is she to provide for the next generation? The traditional safety net provided by the extended family has been eroded, and coping mechanisms have been exhausted by the HIV pandemic. Women whose husbands have died are suspected to carry the virus themselves and are often shunned by their extended families and communities. Thus, high death rates associated with HIV/AIDS and gender inequalities are leaving behind a generation of impoverished, disaffected youth who are susceptible to criminal activities and radical acts. In recognition of the links between gender inequality, poverty and HIV/AIDS, the Millennium Challenge Corporation made gender issues a high priority in its negotiations with Lesotho. In a letter to the Government of Lesotho, the CEO of MCC asserted that the potential impact of a development compact between Lesotho and the MCC focusing on public health and sustainable water and private sector development would be undermined if the issues of gender inequality were not addressed. Shortly thereafter, the Parliament passed the Legal Capacity of Married Persons Act, which has significantly enhanced the legal standing of women in Lesotho. To its credit, the MCC has provided assistance to support meaningful implementation of the act. I strongly encourage the government of Lesotho to continue demonstrating its commitment to improving gender equality in the interest of human rights, economic development, and national security. I hope that other countries in the region will follow suit.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2293, which would require the Secretary of State to submit to Congress a report on efforts to bring to justice the Palestinian terrorists who killed three Americans on October 15, 2003. I would like to begin by expressing my heartfelt condolences to the families and loved ones of John Branchizio, Mark T. Parson, and John Marin Linde, Jr., and all United States citizens who have been victimized by the incessant Palestinian terrorist attacks. These three brave Americans were murdered while accompanying United States diplomats who were going to interview young Palestinians for the opportunity to study in this great country on Fulbright scholarships, offering those youth a chance for a better life. While I am sickened by this deplorable act, I am surprised that for far too long our State Department and the Palestinian Authority have done little to bring the murderers of these Americans to justice. These families and others who have lost loved ones should not have their grief compounded by the lack of justice from our own system. The virtual impunity afforded the certain terrorists sends the wrong foreign policy signal, not only to the American people and our allies in the region, but to the terrorists themselves. Recently, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas established an emergency government in the West Bank, with an independent, Salem Fayyad as Prime Minister. Abbas and Fayyad have made statements opposing terrorism, violence and militia rule that pervades both the West Bank and Gaza. But they must follow up their words with actions. Not only do Abbas and Fayyad need to crack down on terrorism and dismantle all militias within the West Bank, but they must locate, detain, and turn over to U.S. custody the murderers of John Branchizio, Mark Parson, and John Marin Linde so that they can be charged and brought to justice in an American court. They cannot fulfill their responsibility for stopping terrorism in the future without taking action against those who have perpetrated terrorism in the past. Madam Speaker, we have a great responsibility to those Americans who have lost their lives to Palestinian terror. Therefore, our government should consider conditioning any aid to the West Bank emergency government upon that government showing concrete actions in resolving this case. We must end the message that we as a country are fully committed in our resolve to investigate and prosecute the murder of innocent Americans abroad. Again, I strongly condemn the attack on United States citizens by Palestinian terrorists and reiterate our demands that the administration do more to bring their killers to justice. H.R. 2293 is a major step in the right direction, and I am proud to have cosponsored it. For their leadership in introducing this bill, I thank my good friends and colleagues, the chairman and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, Mr. Ackerman and Mr. Pence. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this critical legislation.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of Senate bill 966, the Passport Backlog Reduction Act. All of us have heard from our constituents. Millions of Americans are facing unprecedented delays in the processing of their passport applications. As weeks become months, these painful holdups have wrecked long-planned travel, job opportunities, and family obligations for thousands of our fellow citizens. This situation is incomprehensible and inexcusable. Officials should have anticipated and planned for this increased demand when the new travel security requirements were legislated 3 years ago. Furthermore, the State Department has been collecting additional surcharges under authority granted by Congress 1\1/2\ years ago for the express purpose of meeting the increased demand for passports. But as we learned at last week's hearing before the Foreign Affairs Committee, officials did not adequately prepare for the increased demand that everyone knew would be coming, and there is no good explanation why. At the same time that the planning was botched by their superiors, I want to praise the dedicated and hardworking individuals who have been working on an extended and overtime schedule to address this backlog. Madam Speaker, I am particularly impressed by the men and women of the Miami passport processing center who have maintained their professionalism and their courtesy even in this high pressure situation. The bill before us will help in a limited but an important way to restore the timely passport processing that the American public has every right to expect. By easing certain reemployment restrictions, it will enable retired Foreign Service officers to come back to work on passport and visa processing on more than a part-time basis. It will also allow them to assist with passport fraud investigations which have not kept pace with the dramatic increase in passport applications. Of course, this bill is only a temporary measure that will ease but will not fix the larger problem. Senate bill 966 is no substitute for the budgeting, hiring, and training that must be part of the Department's annual and long-range planning. We appreciate the solemn assurances at last week's hearing that the Departments of State and Homeland Security are now treating these problems with the seriousness that they deserve. I have no doubt that the Committee on Foreign Affairs under Chairman Lantos' leadership will follow up to ensure that the current problems are remedied promptly and avoided in the future. The bill before us, Madam Speaker, is a small part of that remedy and deserves our unanimous support. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 208, which recognizes the 25th anniversary of the founding of Operation Smile, a private nonprofit founded by Dr. and Mrs. William Magee of Virginia in 1982. Madam Speaker, the volunteers for Operation Smile provide reconstructive surgery and other health care to needy children in the United States, as well as in developing countries. They particularly help children with a cleft lip or cleft palate, congenital birth defects that occur as frequently as one in every 600 births. Clefts can cause multiple physical and mental health problems for children and adults, including feeding and speech difficulties, ear infections that can lead to deafness, and low self-esteem, as well as alienation from others. Children worldwide need not, and must not, suffer from these health problems simply because they were born with clefts. Surgery in infancy, adolescence or young adulthood can correct clefts and avert resulting medical and psychological difficulties. Sadly, many families who seek medical care and surgery for children born with clefts are turned away, both in the United States and abroad, due to lack of funds or shortages of medically trained professionals who can provide the care that these children urgently need. Fortunately, the outstanding medical professionals at Operation Smile have, for a quarter of a century, volunteered their time and effort to help save these children and their families. They have provided free reconstructive surgeries to over 100,000 children and young adults in this country and worldwide. They educate and train thousands of health care professionals across the globe. Just as importantly, they are developing future generations of volunteers for this noble cause. Young men and women at more than 450 Operation Smile student associations in the United States and abroad are fund-raising, building awareness and encouraging their fellow students to take charge, to lead and to volunteer their time to help others. In all of these ways, these volunteers demonstrate the potential that volunteers and nonprofits have to change lives, to tackle global problems and to significantly improve the world around them. Because of their 25 years of service, many children and young adults who were born with cleft lip or palate can look at themselves in the mirror with pride, and so can volunteers at Operation Smile. This resolution, offered by my good friend and colleague from Virginia (Mrs. Drake) sends the right message by recognizing and encouraging outstanding volunteers and achievements in the private and the nonprofit sector. Therefore, Madam Speaker, I urge the House to adopt this resolution, H. Res. 208.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce).

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill, which seeks to impose a strategy of defeat on our Armed Forces and our country. By binding our military and our foreign policy in a straitjacket, this legislation would accomplish what thousands of our enemies have sought: to force the United States to retreat from Iraq without a plan for victory. Proponents of rapid withdrawal would like us to ignore the reality that Iraq is but one of the critical battlefields in an ongoing war against Islamic jihadists, against global terrorism, a war declared by the jihadists and which saw its beginnings in November 1979, when Iranian radicals stormed our embassy, took Americans hostages, and held them captive for 444 days. From there Americans, Westerners, innocent human beings were targeted. Where and when were they targeted? In the bombings of the Marine barracks in the U.S. embassy in Beirut in 1983, in the bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, in the bombings of the Khobar Towers in 1996, in the attacks of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, and in the attacks on the USS Cole in the year 2000. Proponents of rapid withdrawal want us to look at the bombings in Iraq in a vacuum, disregarding the similarities to the suicide bombers that have killed scores of innocent Israelis, those who planned and carried out the bombings in London, in Madrid, in Bali that claimed so many innocent lives. These may not be the exact individuals, nor the same groups, but they are part of a global terrorist network working toward the same end, to destroy and to attack us and our allies. The Islamic jihadists will not stop their agenda of destruction simply because we quickly withdraw from Iraq. They will, perhaps, stop when they see our nations, our cities, our communities burning, just as the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon burned on that terrible day of September 11, 2001. They have clearly articulated their goals, listen to their words; al Qaeda's second in command, Al Zawahiri, made it clear in May of this year, and I quote him: ``The empire of evil, the United States, is about to end and a new dawn is about to break over mankind, which will be liberated from the caesars of the White House and Europe and from the Zionists.'' Those seeking to impose an immediate withdrawal deadline are so intent on rushing through this legislation that they appear to have failed to consider the consequences of a U.S. national security interest of what euphemistically is being called a ``phased redeployment.'' How is the strategy of quick withdrawal different from the strategy outlined by Al Zawahiri in a letter that he sent to al Qaeda operatives about driving the U.S. out of Iraq? How would we prevent the development of Iraq into a full base of operations for al Qaeda and other terrorist networks? We pretend to be armchair generals, seeking to undermine the strategies called for by our commanders on the field. But we should not. Some label the current strategy of failure long before this full complement of units had been, in fact, deployed. But those doing the fighting in Iraq know that we have not failed, patriots such as the Parsons brothers from my congressional district. Huber Parsons was serving his third deployment in Iraq, this time with the Army Stryker Brigade, when his vehicle was struck by a deep buried IED just a few months ago. His driver was killed, and Huber had to undergo a number of surgeries. I had the honor of visiting him often at Walter Reed. He is pictured here saluting his fallen brothers-in- arms at a memorial service in Fort Lewis, Washington. His twin, Bill, and his younger brother, Charlie, are both currently serving in Iraq, also with the Army Stryker Brigade. They, like my stepson, Doug, and my daughter-in-law, Lindsay, and so many others who are currently deployed in Iraq, are disheartened when they hear the references to failure and consider that the talks of this rapid withdrawal shows a lack of confidence in their ability to defeat the enemy. Many patriots ask me why the Congress would endanger them and their fellow service men and women by having them engage the enemy with an immediately reduced force. Where, in a region of jihadists, are troops to be deployed to? What Middle Eastern government would want to host a retreating and defeated American Army? How does withdrawal to Kuwait or Qatar, as some have proposed, help us fight al Qaeda in Iraq? If al Qaeda strategies worked in Iraq and forced an American retreat, how can we not conclude that they will also pursue them in Kuwait and Qatar and beyond? Mr. Speaker, George Orwell said that the quickest way of ending a war is to lose it. We should be discussing strategies for victory, not how to ensure our own defeat. And let me close, Mr. Speaker, by reading the words of General Petraeus in an interview just a few days ago word for word. He said, ``I can think of few commanders in history who wouldn't have wanted more troops, more time or more unity among their partners. However, if I could only have one at this point in Iraq, it would be more time. This is an exceedingly tough endeavor that faces countless challenges.'' General Petraeus continues, None of us, Iraqi or American, are anything but impatient and frustrated at where we are. But there are no shortcuts. Success in an endeavor like this is the result of steady, unremittent pressure over the long haul. It is a test of wills, demanding patience, determination and stamina from all involved. General Petraeus, as we know, was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate to be our commander in Iraq, yet somehow we have become better war commanders than General Petraeus. I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), a member of our Foreign Affairs Committee.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume because I'd like to comment on a point that was raised by my good friend from Indiana (Mr. Burton) regarding the intentions of Iran. The deputy interior minister for security affairs and the former deputy head of the Revolutionary Guards in Iran said on April 26 of this year, ``Iran has long-range missiles that can make nowhere safe for America.'' He also said, ``Iran is able to fire tens of thousands of missiles per day at American targets on a daily basis and, with its long-range missiles, can threaten Israel which is acting as America's'' proxy. So it is clear to us, Mr. Speaker, that Iran seeks not just to wipe Israel off the map, as Ahmadinejad has said time and again, but to destroy the United States. So is the plan to immediately leave Iraq so that Iran can begin its takeover of the region? Is this in the national security interests of the United States? Is that going to make us safer? I think that we should carefully consider what will happen were we to withdraw immediately as, it has been called for. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, before I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Inglis) who has traveled to Iraq several times, I yield myself a minute to answer some questions posed on the other side of the aisle. What we have here is a nonspecific, nondetailed, nothing planned for victory. The bill on page 3, since the gentleman refers to the bill, let's look at it. It talks about a reduction, a transition, a limited presence, a limited presence, again, with maximum attention paid to the protection of our Armed Forces. What does that mean? So you want our troops to face the terrorists with even less protection? It shall be further implemented as part of a comprehensive strategy. What do these phrases mean? What would General Petraeus do if this legislation were to become law, which it will not? This is not a plan. It says nothing. It is making a political statement. I am pleased to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Inglis) who has been to Iraq and understands the situation well.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I have the pleasure of yielding 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) who has been to Iraq several times, has wrestled with his conscience and understands the situation of jihadist terrorism worldwide.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to Mr. Price of Georgia. (Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Generals on the ground were consulted on this bill? Seventy percent of Americans support this bill, support immediate withdrawal of our troops? This bill before us is nothing more than political hyperbole, partisan politics using our troops as cover, because the American people don't have this bill in front of them. We didn't have this bill before us until just a few hours ago. Let me show you exactly what the Democratic leadership has scheduled for us to debate, and I use the term lightly. For an entire day, rather than do the hard work of our Congress that we need to do to have more serious discussions on Iraq, on this bill, on appropriations, it's six pages long, six pages long. It was introduced yesterday, so I don't know what commanders on the field we consulted with. I would be interested in doing that, in finding that out. The first page is the title. The second page, it's a ``sense of Congress,'' language, nonbinding. The third page says ``reduce forces to limited presence.'' Who understands what that is? Certainly not the drafters of this bill. The fourth and the fifth page calls for a strategy. Yet this Congress already has demanded a strategy from the President, and it is due in September, a report. That's what the Democrats say they have asked for. But yet they are not willing to wait for that report. The last page is definitions. This is what we are debating today, Democratic politics using our troops as pawns. Commanders on the field who were consulted? Give me a break. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of our time.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to thank you for keeping such careful order on the floor on such a controversial topic.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere of our Foreign Affairs Committee.