Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Trott and Mr. Deutch for introducing this important bill. The concept here is to combat the horrific crime of human trafficking for organ removal. And, as always, I appreciate the support of the ranking member, Mr. Eliot Engel, in moving this antitrafficking bill forward. As hard as it is for us to accept this, as shocking as this is, the circumstances are such that rising global demand and a lack of adequate laws in many countries has fueled the growth of a worldwide black market for transplant organs. The World Health Organization estimates that 10 percent of all transplanted organs worldwide are illegally obtained. That would mean that they were being coerced from vulnerable populations or forcibly harvested from prisoners. Often these prisoners are shot first in order to obtain organs, such as hearts, corneas, or lungs. They are taken from hostages. They are taken from oppressed minorities. An example would be kidneys or part of a liver. These abuses are more than just grave human rights violations. They also have worldwide implications for national security and public health. What do we mean when we say implications for national security? Well, criminal organizations and terrorist groups are increasingly engaging in this black market industry that is valued now at a billion dollars. To give you some of the most extreme examples: ISIS recently issued a fatwa sanctioning forced organ harvesting from captives and, as they call them, from apostates; and traffickers smuggling refugees into Europe have reportedly coerced organ donations, coerced a kidney as payment for travel. A number of studies have underscored how this shady commerce also creates biosecurity threats to the rest of the world. Recipients of infected tissue or organs may become human carriers of disease. Or another problem is drug-resistant pathogens that contribute to the spread of pandemics and antibiotic resistance. Now, the U.S. has led the fight against human trafficking, and I would add, with help from the Foreign Affairs Committee, with help from the legislation that we, our members on the committee, have authored. This bill continues and expands that effort, and it does so by closing the gap in U.S. law that currently fails to recognize the trafficking in persons for the removal of their organs as a form of human trafficking. Specifically, this bill also makes it the policy of the United States to combat such trafficking, to promote the adoption of effective voluntary organ donation systems in bilateral engagements and multinational health forums that we have with other countries. And it requires an annual report to Congress, an annual report on human trafficking for organ removal, which details activities by our State Department and by other countries to combat this crime. Finally, the bill allows for the revocation of passports from any individual that is involved in this kind of activity, that is convicted of an organ trafficking offense under the National Organ Transplant Act, as well as permitting the denial of visas to applicants with such convictions. So I urge all Members to support this important measure. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Trott), who is the author of this bill.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 273, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Ros-Lehtinen and Ranking Member Deutch for their work on this resolution, and their continued work on Holocaust issues. The horrors wrought by the Nazi regime did not end when prisoners finally walked out from behind the barbed wire fences in 1945. Today, the after-effects of Hitler's death camps still haunt the lives of those who survived. Tens of thousands of Holocaust survivors throughout the world live in poverty, forced to choose between feeding themselves and purchasing necessary medication. The problem is staggering. Five hundred thousand survivors remain-- most of them in their 80s. Today, more than one in four lack sufficient access to the care they need to live their final years in comfort and in dignity. For decades, Germany has instituted and funded a number of aid programs in recognition of its obligation to these survivors. However, Germany's own evaluations made clear that more needs to be done. We urge the German government to immediately and fully fund programming for victims' medical, mental health, and long-term care needs. Time is of the essence. Every day that decisions are stalled, we lose another survivor, another story, another chance to show our respect for these individuals who have already endured what no one should. Today's resolution recognizes the moral imperative for us--all of us--to work to ensure a life of dignity, security, and comfort for Holocaust survivors.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment which would unilaterally end the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda. Mr. Chair, ISIS grew out of al Qaeda in Iraq. The President has determined that the 2001 AUMF allows the United States to target ISIS. Both the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs agree that they have full legal authority to combat ISIS, and Congress has supported that view by appropriating funds. Many Members want to enact a new AUMF to renew the authority to fight ISIS and support our troops, but this amendment fails to do so. We must understand that a new AUMF cannot give President Obama any more authority to fight ISIS than he currently claims. It could give him less. The President asked for less in his proposal. It is clear many want an AUMF that limits the authority of this President and the next President. The administration still does not have the broad, overarching strategy needed to defeat these radical Islamist terrorists. Once the President provides that strategy, this House can have an informed debate over a new AUMF, but this amendment would leave us with no strategy and no authority. That is irresponsible.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment, the text of which was previously adopted and favorably reported by the Committee on Foreign Affairs as H.R. 4678. This amendment focuses on asserting Congress's longstanding constitutional and legal authority to determine the future of the U.S. military base at Guantanamo, which senior military officers continue to view as ``indispensable'' to our national security and to our strategic and humanitarian operations in this Hemisphere. For decades--and most recently during the President's trip to Havana--the Cuban regime has demanded the return of the base as a prerequisite to the normalization of relations with the United States. This amendment lays out the legal and historical case why a President may not weaken U.S. ``jurisdiction and control'' over the base without affirmative Congressional action--either a new statute or a treaty concluded with Senate consent. U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay is not a typical basing situation, and U.S. control is not premised on a treaty. Its history is wholly unique and has its roots in Acts of Congress. Cuba became an American protectorate after the U.S. prevailed in the Spanish-American War, which Congress had declared in 1898. In 1901, Congress rightly granted the President conditional authority to return control and governance of the island to the people of Cuba, subject to the express requirement of securing U.S. Naval basing rights there. In fact, the Administration stated that it did not have the power to return governance until that Congressional condition had been met. When the President signed the 1903 Guantanamo Lease--the agreements under which the U.S. continues to exercise ``complete jurisdiction and control'' over the base--the President specifically cited the 1901 Act of Congress as providing his authority to do so. The last Treaty of Relations between the U.S. and Cuba (in 1934) did not nullify, replace, or change the 1903 lease agreements, but noted that they ``shall continue in effect'' until the U.S. and Cuba agree to modify them. This means that any executive attempt to impair the United States' ``jurisdiction and control'' over Naval Station Guantanamo Bay without congressional authority would illegally nullify the 1901 Act of Congress, and infringe on Congress's exercise of its express constitutional powers. Some say giving up Guantanamo isn't in the cards. Why worry? The Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs has recently written, stating that ``the United States has no plans to alter any of the arrangements regarding the base.'' But saying that you ``have no plans'' to do something is not the same as saying that you will not do something. As we have seen in any number of prior situations--whether it be unfulfilled pledges of consultation with Congress prior to any Cuba policy change, or the 11th hour lifting of missile restrictions as part of the Iran nuclear deal--plans can change very quickly, for the worse, with no prior warning to Congress. And we should be concerned about the next Administration's plans. This amendment is about protecting congressional prerogative during this Administration, and the next, and the next. Congress needs to make clear its role in any decision to relinquish U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, which remains indispensable to our nation's defense, and our support for regional stability. This amendment does this, and deserves our support.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2143, the Starr-Camargo Bridge act, introduced by Senator Cornyn and by Representative Cuellar of Texas. With today's passage, this bill goes to the President's desk for signature. The Starr-Camargo Bridge act grants permanent authority to continue operating and maintaining the international bridge that connects Rio Grande City, Texas, with Mexican cities such as Monterrey and Mexico City. This bridge is one of 28 vehicle border crossings on the Texas- Mexico border and one of two privately owned crossing facilities. The Starr-Camargo Bridge has had continued growth in commercial traffic since 2009, and it plays an important role in facilitating legitimate trade and travel in the region. This bill, S. 2143, would permanently extend the authority for the Starr-Camargo Bridge Company to operate the bridge. It would grant the bridge company the same rights and privileges already granted to this body to the B and P Bridge Company in Progreso, Texas. By granting this authority, we would be incentivizing the Starr-Camargo Bridge Company to continue maintaining and expanding the bridge's capacity to keep up with growing trade and commerce along the Texas border with Mexico. This legislation received the full support of the Committee on Foreign Affairs when it was marked up last month. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to thank Representative Cuellar for his steadfast leadership to ensure the House's consideration of this legislation and that we move forward on this. I thought I would also point out that this bill comes at no cost to the taxpayer. What it does instead is incentivizes the private sector to invest and maintain this important commercial border crossing. That is the point here. While the actual end date for the bridge's authority is still some years away, the lack of that permanent authority has already begun to constrain the financing of long-term improvements that will help make the crossing more efficient and secure. So I thank Mr. Cuellar again and, also, Mr. Castro and Mr. Poe, both members of the committee who have also been strong supporters. I thank Mr. Engel for helping to ensure that our border infrastructure is maintained and modernized to keep pace with the growing legitimate commercial activity across our southern border. I encourage my colleagues to support this measure. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 2143) to provide for the authority for the successors and assigns of the Starr-Camargo Bridge Company to maintain and operate a toll bridge across the Rio Grande near Rio Grande City, Texas, and for other purposes.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and to extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1150) to amend the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 to improve the ability of the United States to advance religious freedom globally through enhanced diplomacy, training, counterterrorism, and foreign assistance efforts, and through stronger and more flexible political responses to religious freedom violations and violent extremism worldwide, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues for their contributions to this bill and to today's debate, especially Mr. Smith, Congresswoman Barbara Comstock and Mr. Engel. The right to believe and practice one's religion according to the dictates of conscience is often called the first freedom. It is one of the founding ideas of our Nation, but we do not believe that it is only an American value. Rather, this is what we believe here. We believe it flows from the inherent dignity of every human person, and it deserves protection everywhere. In today's world, those who are most violently opposed to religious freedom also pose the biggest threat to our Nation. They also pose the biggest threat to civilization worldwide. Thus, the promotion of religious liberty is not some isolated human rights concern. No. It is a key component of our national security. And this bill, now authored by Mr. Smith, H.R. 1150, contains important updates to the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 that will enhance the effectiveness of the United States' efforts to promote that liberty around the world, so it deserves our unanimous support. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, 18 years after enactment of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, the right to believe and practice one's faith remains under threat around the world. The threats come not just from authoritarian regimes obsessed with control, such as North Korea, Iran, or Vietnam, which were the focus of that law, but also from lethal terrorist groups. Two months ago this Chamber made history by declaring that the so- called Islamic State, or ISIS, is committing genocide against religious and ethnic minorities. It has committed mass murder, beheadings, rape, torture, slavery, and the kidnapping of children, among many other atrocities. ISIS dynamites churches and flattens ancient monasteries, hoping to erase the very existence of religious groups that disagree with their brutal world view. Boko Haram in Nigeria and al Shabaab in East Africa are also responsible for their own deadly persecutions, both also linked to ISIS in their support for that terrorist movement. These groups have turned religious intolerance into a murderous force of global instability. The right to believe and practice according to the dictates of conscience is a direct challenge to their ideologies. Thus, religious freedom is not just a human rights issue; frankly, today, it is a global security issue. However, current law related to religious freedom, which focuses solely on governments of sovereign states, does not address this reality. Based on years of oversight and multiple hearings, H.R. 1150, the Frank R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act, updates the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 to improve the coordination and effectiveness of U.S. efforts to promote religious liberty around the world and also expressly addresses the role of these non-state actors like ISIS. Introduced by Subcommittee Chairman Smith and Congresswoman Anna Eshoo, the bill was amended and agreed to by the Foreign Affairs Committee and has more than 115 bipartisan cosponsors. It is fitting that this bill is named in honor of our former colleague from Virginia, Frank Wolf, a tireless advocate for human rights and the author of the original International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which we are amending. By enhancing coordination, confronting non-state actors, and improving reporting and training, H.R. 1150 is a helpful refinement of our statutory commitment to combat religious persecution around the globe. It deserves our unanimous support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Financial Services, Washington, DC, May 13, 2016. Hon. Ed Royce, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Royce: I am writing concerning H.R. 1150, the Frank R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act of 2016. As a result of your having consulted with the Committee on Financial Services concerning provisions in the bill that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction, I agree to forgo action on the bill so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House Floor. The Committee on Financial Services takes this action with our mutual understanding that, by foregoing consideration of H.R. 1150 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as this or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction. Our Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or similar legislation, and requests your support for any such request. Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 1150 and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in your committee's report to accompany the legislation, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof. Sincerely, Jeb Hensarling, Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Comstock), our esteemed colleague, who ably represents the district formerly served by Frank Wolf, who is honored in the title of this bill. Representative Barbara Comstock is a coauthor of this bill with Mr. Smith, and I thank them both.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations, and the author of the bill.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As one of the coauthors of this legislation, I really want to thank Representative Chabot for introducing this measure and for being a longtime champion on Taiwan, especially as he was chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific last Congress. I want to thank Mr. Engel as well for his efforts on this legislation. We have a commitment to democracy, and we share that with Taiwan. We share this commitment to the rule of law, to human rights. Frankly, Taiwan serves as an example of what can be built based upon these shared principles, and so do we. I think the Six Assurances are a critical element of U.S.-Taiwan policy, but obviously they are not consistently referenced or referred to as a cornerstone of U.S.-Taiwan policy alongside the Taiwan Relations Act, which is considered that cornerstone. Passage of H. Con. Res. 88 will put that longstanding verbal agreement onto paper, and, in turn, it will call on the administration and future administrations in unambiguous terms to publicly abide by the assurances offered by President Reagan. Taiwan is one of America's closest friends, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H. Con. Res. 88. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot). He is chairman of the Small Business Committee, a senior member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the author of this measure.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 88) reaffirming the Taiwan Relations Act and the Six Assurances as the cornerstone of United States-Taiwan relations, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the chairman emeritus of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 88. I would like to recognize Mr. Chabot for his longstanding dedication and support for the people of Taiwan. Mr. Speaker, Taiwan has always been a strong friend and critical ally to the United States. Congress has been central to this relationship, championing a strong relationship with Taiwan through landmark measures like the Taiwan Relations Act and through pressing successive administrations to fulfill their obligation to sell defensive arms to Taiwan. Taiwan is now the United States' ninth largest trading partner, and it is in the U.S.' interest to have a stable and a prosperous Taiwan. It is an exciting time in Taiwan. In January, a free and fair election once again demonstrated the strength and vibrancy of Taiwan's democratic system. And in 3 days, we expect the newly elected President to be inaugurated in a peaceful transfer of power from one party to another. The people of Taiwan should be proud of their prosperous, free, and democratic society and what they have been able to accomplish, despite having to face countless challenges outside of their control. Mr. Speaker, when the U.S. established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China on January 1, 1979, the U.S. Congress acted just 100 days later to pass the Taiwan Relations Act, which would ensure that the United States maintained a robust and enduring relationship with Taiwan. Three years later, in 1982, President Reagan deepened the U.S. commitment to Taiwan by issuing the Six Assurances to Taiwan, which included treating Taiwan as we would treat any one of our allies when making decisions on defensive arms sales, not setting a date for termination of arms sales, and not altering the Taiwan Relations Act. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is especially important when it comes to the Six Assurances. When the Reagan administration delivered the Six Assurances, it was by way of a verbal agreement and has largely remained as such since 1982. Today, by passing this resolution, Congress is going on record that the cornerstone of U.S.-Taiwan policy is not only the Taiwan Relations Act, but also the Six Assurances. This important measure solidifies President Reagan's commitment to Taiwan and urges this administration and the ones that follow to publicly, proactively, and consistently take the Six Assurances into account when handling United States-Taiwan relations. I am proud that in the 114th Congress we have already passed legislation which supports Taiwan's inclusion in INTERPOL and that we are now also passing a measure which will reassure our friends in Taiwan and press the administration to continue to abide by the Six Assurances. I am also proud that maintaining a strong relationship with Taiwan continues to be a bipartisan issue. I appreciate Mr. Eliot Engel's support on this initiative, the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Let me say that, by passing this resolution, we, the United States Congress, are yet again taking another step toward strengthening the U.S.-Taiwan partnership. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend from Virginia, Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte, his Ranking Member, Mr. Conyers, and the gentleman and gentlelady from New York--Mr. Katko and Miss Rice--for their work on H.R. 4985, the Kingpin Designation Improvement Act, which deserves our support. In the context of today's floor debate, it is important that we discuss the extensive role of Iran's primary regional proxy-- Hezbollah--in the international drug trade. Earlier this year, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration announced that they have, in cooperation with law enforcement agencies from 7 other nations, disrupted a global criminal enterprise Hezbollah was using to finance its participation in the Syrian conflict, as well as to plan for a future war with Israel. Unfortunately, this is nothing new. For years, Hezbollah has had business connections with South American drug cartels, and has been using them to enter the narcotics trafficking business. In 2011 and 2013, the Department of the Treasury and other agencies designated core Hezbollah members and affiliates for engaging in international narcotics networks. As a result, the Hezbollah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015, which I authored and passed into law in December, required specific Administration reporting on Hezbollah's international narcotics trafficking networks. Unfortunately, once a terrorist organization enters this business, they seldom leave. Sanctions relief for Iran as a result of the Administration's flawed deal with that regime, and the resulting inflow of Iranian money to Hezbollah will not likely cause them to turn away from the lucrative drug industry. Rather, it may enable Hezbollah to double down on their efforts to finance their destructive regional activities. For example, instead of 150,000 rockets on Israel's northern border, Hezbollah could afford to field 300,000, financed by the Iranian regime and Hezbollah's trafficking of narcotics into our communities. With this in mind, it is important that we have robust Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act authorities in place, which this legislation ensures. I support the bill.