Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me respond to the gentlewoman and to the argument in terms of what has not been found regarding weapons of mass destruction. The Committee on International Relations had a hearing on this very recently. During that hearing we heard testimony to the fact that Saddam Hussein was on the edge of a precipice with regards to the ability to unleash weapons of mass destruction. I am just going to briefly mention some of the work of Jeffrey Goldberg, who spent many months inside Iraq; and as he says, when Saddam Hussein maneuvered UNSCOM, the weapons inspectors, out of the country in 1998, the weapons inspectors had found a sizable portion of his arsenal, but were vexed by what they could not find. His scientists have produced and weaponized anthrax. They have manufactured botulinum toxin which causes muscular paralysis and death. They have made a bacterium which causes gas gangrene, a condition in which the flesh rots. They have also made wheat-cover smut which can be used to poison crops, and ricin, which, when absorbed into the lungs, causes hemorrhagic pneumonia. And according to Gary Milhollin, the director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, whose Iraq Watch project monitors Saddam's weapons capabilities, inspectors could not account for a great deal of weaponry that is in Iraq's possession, including 4 tons of nerve agent VX, 600 tons of ingredients for VX, as much as 3,000 tons of other poison gas agents, at least 550 artillery shells filled with mustard gas; nor did they find the stores of aflatoxin which have been manufactured there that have been put on warheads. I guess I would just echo the words of Jeffrey Goldberg when he says Saddam Hussein's motives are unclear because for the past decade the development of these weapons has caused nothing but trouble for him. His international isolation grows not from his past crimes, but from his refusal to let weapons inspectors dismantle his nonconventional weapons programs. When Iraqi dissident Kanan Makiya was asked why Saddam Hussein is so committed to these programs he said, ``I think this regime developed a very specific ideology associated with power and how to extend that power, and these weapons play a very important psychological and political part.'' So yes, we do have ample evidence.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, much has been said today, and I am sure over the next few days much more will be said, as it should. The issue of authorizing the use of our Armed Forces is a momentous one, and it demands the thorough consideration of this Congress, and I believe we will be giving this some 30 hours of debate. September 11 was a cruel wake-up call. After the Cold War, I am afraid our country indulged in the notion that we could shut out the world. The Soviet military power that existed, coupled with the expansionist ideology of Marxism, had vanished as a threat to the United States. There was exuberance that America could cruise on the international front. During that time, we lowered our defenses and downplayed many troubling developments, including the rise of al-Qaeda and the rise of Saddam Hussein's capabilities, with his development of weapons of mass destruction, to harm our Nation. September 11 harshly brought home the fact that the world is a dangerous place, it has always been, and that threats must be dealt with before they hit home, as they did hit home last year with such terrible impact. Last night, President Bush made a powerful case against Saddam Hussein's regime. It has hostile intentions; it possesses weapons of mass destruction; it has means to harm us massively, means that are increasing daily; and that it is only a matter of time before Saddam strikes again against America's interests. The President spoke even of Iraq possessing, and I am going to quote from his speech, ``a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical and biological weapons across broad areas.'' Well, that is why I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. We have had a long debate today, and I would like to address a point that was raised earlier. Iraq was described as an impoverished Third World nation. The suggestion was that there is no threat there. Many Americans may think of Iraq in this way. If so, they must realize that while many Iraqis are suffering under Saddam, his regime is not impoverished. As a matter of fact, our General Accounting Office, our GAO, did a study in which they found that some $6.6 billion between 1996 and 2001 was siphoned off for use by the regime. British intelligence, that did their own analysis all the way up until several weeks ago, tells us that between 9 billion and $10 billion has been siphoned off in surcharges, kickbacks, illegal exports. Let me tell the Members, Mr. Speaker, that $9 billion to $10 billion pays for the development of a lot of weapons of mass destruction. One could buy a lot with that amount of money. It is not improbable that Saddam Hussein is developing nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. I tell the Members that U.N. inspectors found plans for a bomb that would require 34 pounds of enriched uranium. I had an opportunity in the Committee on International Relations to ask our former CIA Director, James Woolsey, how long it would take if Saddam obtained the U-235, the enriched uranium, that he is attempting to obtain right now. He said if he had the uranium, it would take them about 4 months before a nuclear weapon was ready. He may already have that uranium; and as we know from other reports, if he is not able to buy it on the world market, it is only a matter of time, 3 years at the most, before he develops that capability himself. So it is only a matter of time. The Iraqi regime has long employed very capable scientists and technicians. Those of us who have traveled to Moscow talked to the Russians who ran their program, who have shared with us that some of their very capable scientists are in the Middle East today, some of them working in Iraq. Iraq has access to a developed infrastructure. The regime has ample resources from its oil wealth, giving it the ability to bid for the considerable scientific and technological expertise. They use front organizations and front companies in order to obtain this technology into Iraq. They have key materials that have been floating around since the break-up of the East bloc. So this is not a ragtag dictatorship we are dealing with; it is an able tyranny dedicated and capable of doing us real harm. That is why action has to be taken to disarm Saddam Hussein. I would like to address some of the other concerns that have been expressed on the floor of this House today. Some opponents of this resolution have asked, why now? I would like to point out to my colleagues that it was in 1998, 4 years ago, that Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction program threatened vital U.S. interests. Congress then urged the President to take appropriate action to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations, including relinquishing its weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqi Liberation Act that Congress passed that year endorsed a change of the Iraqi regime, and that was 4 years ago. Our Nation did not do anything to effectively address this, but Congress recognized it as being a real threat. By authorizing action to forcefully address this challenge now, we are hardly being rash. If anything, this action is overdue. The fact is that Iraq for years has pursued weapons of mass destruction with great determination. It had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. It is estimated that were it not for the war, Iraq would have had nuclear weapons no later than 1993. Neither Saddam's Gulf War defeat nor a slew of U.N. resolutions were a deterrent. In 1998, the International Atomic Energy Agency dismantled extensive nuclear weapons facilities in Iraq, including three uranium enrichment sites, as President Bush noted last night. This regime has been operating free of inspectors for the last 4 years. Is there any reason to believe that Iraq is not near acquiring a nuclear weapon? Some have charged that all questions have not been answered. What will a post-Saddam Iraq look like? Yes, it is our responsibility to best anticipate what a post-Saddam Middle East will look like and best account for it, but we cannot allow ourselves to be paralyzed by the uncertainty that is part and parcel of international politics. To resist acting in the face of a mortal threat because we do not have a crystal ball would be folly. Did we have all the answers when we intervened in Afghanistan? No. We heard that we would get bogged down in a bloody quagmire, as the Russians did a dozen years earlier. We did not. Yes, we have much work left to do in Afghanistan, but our military has performed in the stellar way many of us expected it would. The Taliban was routed, as was part of al-Qaeda. Those who oppose this resolution based upon concerns about stability in Iraq and the region should ask why their vision of stability in Iraq and the region is based upon Saddam's continued role. Is that the best this region can do? Some have raised concerns about the Iraqi people, suggesting they will suffer. If war comes, there certainly will be suffering, but I suggest that nothing is harming Iraqis more than Saddam's tyranny. We do have Iraqi children without food and medicine, but let us lay responsibility where responsibility belongs: on this palace-building dictator who squanders his nation's resources. This is one of the most repressive regimes in the world. Amnesty International has reported that Iraq is the country with the greatest number of people missing or unaccounted for. One human rights group reports that Saddam has killed over 500 journalists and intellectuals, and tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary Iraqi citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, torture, burning, electric shocks, starvation, mutilation, and rape. This is how Saddam's regime makes Iraqis suffer. I can only imagine its disdain for Americans. Saddam is in possession of weapons of mass destruction. He is working to advance his deadly arsenal. Can there be any doubt that we must act before our Nation is hit? It is always easier to kick a problem down the road, to deal with it later. We do that too often around here. What is required to beat that syndrome is leadership, leadership willing to deal with an unpleasant situation head on. That is what our President and his national security team are showing. Critics say that the administration is not exploring all options. It is exploring options. We may avoid war. What option the President has no interest in, though, and I think this is to his credit, is shirking his responsibility for the defense of our Nation. He certainly is not willing to allow the nations of the United Nations Security Council to dictate the terms by which our Nation is defended, which is what some are calling for. After any military action, it will be incumbent upon our country to stay the course to see that the new Iraq no longer threatens us. That means ridding the country of weapons of mass destruction, but also helping to see that Iraq has a chance of becoming a successful state. This will mean helping the Iraqi people, to whom, it should be emphasized, we hold no hostility. Helping build stability is our current challenge in Afghanistan, and helping to give Afghanistan and Iraq a chance for stability and a decent government will require a substantial U.S. commitment. Given the threat to our security that Iraq and Afghanistan pose, we must make this investment. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to conclude tonight by noting that we have spoken of chemical weapons of mass destruction, and I would like to bring to my colleagues' attention some of the observations of New Yorker writer Jeffrey Goldberg, who traveled to Northern Iraq, spent quite some time there interviewing hundreds of women now barren, hundreds of people now blind, as a result of chemical attack. As he interviewed the survivors of the attacks on the Kurds, he had some observations that I think we should pay attention to, because during his research he found that a biological agent called aflatoxin had been manufactured. In 1995, the government of Saddam Hussein admitted to UN weapons inspectors that his scientists had weaponized this deadly biological agent. Aflatoxin is unique, because what it does is it causes liver cancer. It produces it particularly well in children. Weapons inspectors found that Saddam was able to load aflatoxin into two warheads capable of being fitted on to Skud missiles. Americans need a good sense of who we are dealing with. This is a race against time. In answer to the question, of all the dictatorships, why this one, we have this answer from the man who interviewed all of these survivors of those chemical attacks. He said, ``Because this is a figure of singular danger. To review,'' he said, ``there is no dictator in power anywhere in the world who has so far in his career invaded two neighboring countries, fired ballistic missiles at the civilians of two other neighboring countries, tried to have assassinated an ex-president of the United States, harbored al Qaeda fugitives, attacked civilians with chemical weapons, attacked the soldiers of an enemy country with chemical weapons, conducted biological weapons experiments on human subjects, committed genocide, and then there is, of course, the matter of the weaponized aflatoxin, a tool of mass murder, a tool of nothing else except mass murder.'' He said, ``I do not know how any thinking person could believe that Saddam Hussein is a run-of-the-mill dictator. No one comes close to matching his extraordinary and variegated record of malevolence.'' So, Saddam Hussein, in his words, is ``uniquely evil, the only ruler in power today and the first one since Hitler to commit chemical genocide.'' ``Is that enough of a reason to remove him from power?'' He asked himself that question, and he says, ``I would say yes, if never again is in fact actually to mean never again, because Saddam is a man without any moral limits. That is why it is so important to keep nuclear weapons from his hands.'' Well, the current threat posed by Iraq is not like the Gulf War, and I appreciate that the case for action may not appear as clear-cut to some. A hostile army has not crossed a border, as Saddam's did then; an invaded state has not asked us for help, as Kuwait did. But the battlefield in the new war on terrorism is not the desert of Iraq and Kuwait. Unfortunately, we must now be concerned with the conniving of a relatively few number of terrorists and the regimes that harbor them. Today's world, with modern technology, sadly, has been transformed. I have no doubts that the regime of Saddam Hussein, its generals, its intelligence service, scientists and technicians, poses a mortal threat to our country, and we must act. Finally, I would like to commend the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces. We hope that they do not have to go into battle against Iraq. We hope to defend Hussein's regime without firing a shot. We hope to disarm him of his chemical, biological and nuclear program. But if that is not the case, if our troops are dispatched against Iraq, we know that the American people will stand behind the brave Americans wearing the uniform. They have served us well in Afghanistan and in so many other regions of the world, defending our great country and its enduring values. We owe our service men and women and all who have served before a great deal of gratitude.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode), a member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the vice chairman for yielding me some time; and I rise also in support of this legislation. As has been mentioned, this bill differs from the one that the House of Representatives acted upon last year; and while this Sudan Peace Act is maybe not as muscular as the version that the House sent to the other body, it should still manage to encourage the end of a horrific war that has taken close to two million lives and has ruined countless others for 20 years. The Sudan Peace Act most certainly deserves our support, and I would just like to mention that many of the Members here have seen firsthand, I think the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) will be joining us; I know the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf); I know that our vice chairman, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) of this committee have seen the consequences firsthand of this war. In my constituency is a pastor who has adopted two young girls whose mother was shot in their presence. One of those girls has a bullet wound in her leg as a consequence of the terror that has been perpetuated on the people of southern Sudan, and I think this legislation rightly targets the Sudanese government's horrendous acts. The regime in Khartoum has continued its practice of using food as a weapon. It has sustained a bombing campaign against civilian targets, even international aid sites in southern Sudan; and many of us have seen the photographs from constituents of ours who have gone over to try to help and have taken pictures of the sites of international aid camps, of towns, of villages that have been hit by helicopter gunships, that have been shelled, that have been burned. This is a government in the past that has supported slavery, and I think the Sudan Peace Act rightly condemns the government of Sudan for its abysmal human rights record, while recognizing that human rights violations occur on all sides of this conflict. It threatens punitive measures against the Sudanese government unless that government is constructively engaged in the ongoing peace process, and this legislation also takes the step of calling on the Secretary of State to collect information about incidences that may constitute crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, and other such violations of international law. I would like to note that in the previous session of Congress the House had passed a resolution labeling the Khartoum's government's acts as genocide. It is important to build the record. This Act commends the efforts also of Senator John Danforth, the special presidential envoy to Sudan, to end this long-running conflict. It recognizes that the U.S. must play a critical role in promoting peace in Sudan, a reality I believe that this administration understands. This legislation makes a resource commitment to build civil institutions and assist suffering people in the south of Sudan; and, in these ways, the Sudan Peace Act is Congress' way of bolstering the administration's peace push in Sudan. That is why I urge passage.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials into the Record on this legislation.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in strong support of my bipartisan legislation, H.R. 163, the Mortgage Servicing Clarification Act. This carefully written legislation addresses a specific problem for consumers and businesses involved in the mortgage servicing industry by simply clarifying the existing law governing mortgage servicing. This uncontroversial bill enjoys the support of 12 cosponsors, eight Democrats and four Republicans, and has been approved for consideration under the suspension of the rules by both the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services. Mr. Speaker, I introduced this bill to fix a problem in the mortgage servicing industry which has hampered the ability of this industry to serve its clients effectively and to conduct its business efficiently for too long. Currently, when a mortgage servicing company acquires the rights to service a portfolio of home loans, it is exempt from the unnecessary strictures of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act under the creditor exemption that was also extended to the originator of the mortgage. The new mortgage servicer is extended this exemption because its relationship to the borrower is more like the relationship between a borrower and a lender than it is like the relationship between a borrower and a true collections agency. The law already recognizes this reality. However, in the typical loan servicing portfolio transfer, a small percentage of the loans acquired by a new servicer will inevitably be delinquent or technically in default at the time of transfer. These loans are currently treated by the law as being subject to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act; and subsequently the new servicers of these loans are required to provide certain form notices, known as Miranda warnings, to the borrower. The law also currently requires that in every subsequent contact, both written and oral, whether initiated by the servicer or the borrower, the servicer is required to provide a shorter, mini-Miranda notice disclosing that the communication is ``an attempt to collect a debt'' and that any information provided by the borrower will be used toward that end. The purpose of these cookie-cutter warnings is to prevent unscrupulous debt collectors from using false or misleading tactics, such as a phony winning sweepstakes claim, to trick consumers into divulging private financial information or personal details like their home address or their home phone number. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act has worked extremely well in preventing bad actors in the debt collection business from using lies and deceit to harm consumers, and this legislation would in no way prevent it from continuing to protect American consumers. However, as I have already mentioned, mortgage servicers are not like debt collectors. Their role to consumers is much more like that of a mortgage originator. And in the context of a mortgage servicing transfer, these Miranda notices are both detrimental to consumers and unnecessary and inefficient for mortgage servicers' operations. First, the notice misleads the borrower about the nature of the relationship between him or her and the new servicer. Unlike true debt collectors, mortgage servicers have a long-term relationship with their client, and these harshly worded notices often have the effect of discouraging a borrower who is slightly late on a mortgage payment from contacting their new servicer for fear that the servicer is a true third-party debt collector. This ends up frustrating the servicer's efforts to work with delinquent borrowers on developing strategies to bring their loans current and keep their credit ratings intact. A mortgage servicer's biggest hurdle in helping delinquent borrowers to help themselves is getting them on the phone, and these threatening Miranda notices only contribute to that unnecessary fear without doing anything to help the borrower. Additionally, the information protected by the Miranda notice is information already in the servicer's possession, so nothing new is truly protected by requiring these additional legalistic and threatening notices be provided. Finally, these warnings simply make consumers feel unnecessarily defensive and antagonistic toward their new servicer during the first step of their new association, which can have a chilling effect on the rest of their relationship. Mortgage servicers typically send these Miranda notices along with a new customer's welcome letter as required by the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, and this letter also includes important consumer information about the new servicer and the borrower's monthly payment arrangements. This preliminary contact is the first opportunity that a servicer has to create a positive relationship with a new client, and the harsh language used in the Miranda warning can create animosity between the servicer and the borrower where none need exist. Additionally, because the mini-Miranda is required in all subsequent contacts, they can continue for decades, even after customers bring their loans current and keep them that way for years. H.R. 163 resolves this problem by creating a narrow exemption from Miranda notices for the servicers of federally related first lien mortgages whose primary function is servicing current loans, not collecting third-party debts. It exempts these servicers only from the Miranda notices, leaving all other borrower protections required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in place. This legislation is consistent with a longstanding recommendation from the Federal Trade Commission to improve the mortgage servicing process. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bipartisan legislation to improve the mortgage servicing process for both the consumer and for the companies who serve them. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 163) to amend the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to exempt mortgage servicers from certain requirements of the Act with respect to federally related mortgage loans secured by a first lien, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank my colleague from Texas (Mr. Bentsen) who is the cosponsor of this legislation. I also want to thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), again, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to close by reiterating that this bill is a narrowly tailored bill that enjoys strong bipartisan support and the long-time support of the Federal Trade Commission. This legislation is a commonsense, consumer-friendly fix to the law, to the law that currently governs the mortgage servicing process that has been cleared for consideration under the suspension of the rules by both the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), chairman, and by the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce). It does not sacrifice or alter any of the meaningful protections afforded to consumers by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Rather than, it creates a narrow exemption for mortgage services whose primary function is servicing current mortgage loans, not the third-party collection of debt, from having to threaten their newest and most needy customers with a legalistic and misleading pro forma notice. The law as it is currently written prevents these at-risk consumers from building strong relationships with their mortgage servicers, putting those consumers whose mortgages may be uncharacteristically later delinquent at the time that they are acquired at a distinct disadvantage. The exemption that this legislation creates is already extended to mortgage originators and those loans that are current at the time they are acquired by a new servicer. This legislation simply recognizes that the relationship between a mortgage servicer and a customer more closely resembles the relationship between a mortgage originator and a consumer than the relationship between a consumer and a third-party debt collector. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to stand up for consumers and help to increase the efficiency of the mortgage servicing industry by supporting this commonsense and bipartisan legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance my time.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5422, the Child Abduction Prevention Act. I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of the AMBER Alert legislation contained in this bill. As we witnessed this past summer, Amber Plans have worked to bring children home safely. An AMBER Alert was sent out to a number of States to search for 10-year old Nicole Timmons of Riverside, California. The alert was not only delivered throughout California but also in neighboring States, and Nicole was found in Nevada. What if Nicole's abductor went to an area that wasn't covered by the AMBER Alert System? Currently, there is no national coordination. In fact, only 18 states have statewide plans and when an AMBER Alert is activated, all areas of the country are not covered. Instead, the alert is targeted more locally, regionally, or statewide. With the recent expansion of the AMBER Alert Program, a system is needed to ensure that neighboring states and communities will be able to honor each other's alerts when an abductor is traveling with the child to other parts of the country. This bill helps coordinate AMBER Alerts nationally. We need a coordinated nation-wide effort so that abducted children transported across state lines do not fall through the cracks. Speed is essential when trying to rescue an abducted child. Seventy-four percent of children who are murdered by their abductors are killed within 3 hours of being taken. That's why it is imperative that law enforcement and the media react quickly and get the word back to the community. The AMBER Alert Plan does just that by sending an emergency alert to the public when a child has been abducted. Several high profile child abductions and recoveries have recently demonstrated how successful the AMBER Alert Plan can be--to date, the AMBER Alert has been credited with recovering about 30 children. In addition, the bill would provide grants on a 50-50 matching basis to update provide training and technology to law enforcement, and for the purpose of disseminating alerts. The Senate has passed similar legislation and President George Bush has also announced his strong support for a national AMBER Alert Network. I urge Congress to pass this important bill quickly so that the AMBER Alert System will be there for all of our Nation's children.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, this week, the world witnessed yet another act of senseless violence. I rise as the Co-Chairman of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans to express my condolences to the families of the victims of the brutal attack on the Swaminarayan Temple in Gujarat. Thirty-two--including many children--died in an attack in Gandhinagar. Last year, I lead a congressional delegation to Gujarat immediately following the devastating earthquake that hit the state. From that trip and my dealings with the Gujarati community in the U.S., I have developed a deep fondness for the people of Gujarat. During my visit, I visited the Swaminarayan Temple and witnessed first hand the efforts of the Swaminarayan Temple to assist victims of the earthquake. Our heart goes out to all Gujaratis harmed by this violent act. The Swaminarayan organization was established in 1907. It is a religion that preaches religious tolerance and practical spirituality. I only wish that more people in this world shared those values.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, this week, the world witnessed yet another act of senseless violence. I rise as the Co-Chairman of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans to express my condolences to the families of the victims of the brutal attack on the Swaminarayan Temple in Gujarat. Thirty-two—including many children—died in an attack in Gandhinagar. Last year, I led a congressional delegation to Gujarat immediately following the devastating earthquake that hit the state. From that trip and my dealings with the Gujarati community in the U.S., I have developed a deep fondness for the people of Gujarat. During my visit, I visited the Swaminarayan Temple and witnessed first hand the efforts of the Swaminarayan Temple to assist victims of the earthquake. Our heart goes out to all Gujaratis harmed by this violent act. The Swaminarayan organization was established in 1907. It is a religion that preaches religious tolerance and practical spirituality. I only wish that more people in this world shared those values.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to voice my support for this important legislation. Last Friday, during the first hearing called for this conference committee, I stated my belief that the similarities between the House and Senate versions of this bill were greater than the differences between them. My belief has been vindicated here today, proven by the speedy conclusion reached between the House and the Senate on this conference report. Last Friday, I also spoke of my desire to work with my colleagues from the other body, and from the other side of the aisle, to send President Bush the strongest, most sensible bill possible so that we could restore investor trust in the fairness of our capital markets. I believe that this legislation does precisely that, and I would like to compliment Chairman Oxley and Chairman Sarbanes for their hard work, dedication and willingness to compromise to reach a quick conclusion on this bill on behalf of the American people. The American investors who have lost their hard-earned savings, and those hard-working employees who have lost their jobs because of corporate malfeasance deserve quick and decisive action from their elected officials. Today, we have risen above partisanship and helped to restore confidence in the American capitalist system. Last week I described the bi-partisan, anti-fraud sentiment that I believe is motivating each of us to reform American corporate governance and auditing standards by passing this legislation. Many of us here recognized a shortcoming in our legal system--the reticence to treat corporate criminal behavior as seriously as we treat common criminal behavior--and resolved that this bill should reflect the true seriousness of white-collar crime. I believe that that this legislation accomplishes this task. By including the House-passed language to increase the criminal penalties for securities fraud, document-shredding and mail and wire fraud, I believe that we have acted wisely and swiftly to prevent other Enrons, WorldComs and Global Crossings from happening. By including Chairman Baker's FAIR language, we have ensured that wronged shareholders whose hard-earned savings are stolen from them by pinstriped crooks have those funds returned to their retirement accounts, and not used to build a $100 million retirement mansion in Bermuda for an expatriate executive. By ensuring that companies disclose material changes to their financial condition to the public on a rapid and current basis, we have ensured that everyone, not just corporate insiders, has access to it. I would like to congratulate all of my colleagues here today on their excellent work in producing this legislation, and I look forward to seeing President Bush sign it into law. The American people deserve nothing less.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time; and actually, this measure contains the best of both, some Democrat ideas and some Republican ideas. I think the final language on the independent accounting board was very close to the Sarbanes bill. But the provision put forward by House Republicans that we would now have 25 years hard time for securities fraud is important. It will be a deterrent. I am delighted to see the concept that we are going to criminalize shredding, the concept that we are going to increase penalties for wire fraud and mail fraud. The Republican idea also that when we get convictions, when this SEC brings back the resources from those who have committed corporate malfeasance, that money will then go back to the shareholders, the Baker's amendment, that is an important gain for this bill. I think Chairman Oxley, in including the provision to disclose material changes to financial conditions and in real time so that the public sees that as soon as any insider trader sees that is another important change that we brought in on the Republican side of the House bill. So this is the best of both Democrat and Republican concepts, and it will protect the shareholders in the future and offer deterrence.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, the importance of democracy and strong democratic institutions in today's world cannot be overstated; we have too many recent examples of the dangers posed by their absence. I would like to salute the International Republican Institute (IRI) and its dedicated work to promote and strengthen democracy around the world. It is now impossible for us to ignore the potential that unstable states have as breeding grounds for terrorists and terrorist activities--particularly in Africa, where many weak and undemocratic states make fertile ground for terrorism. Africa has been the scene of past terrorist acts, as we saw in the tragic bombings of U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In my role as Chairman of the International Relations Africa Subcommittee, I have had the opportunity to witness IRI's work in a number of African countries in which political development has been seriously challenged by ethnic and religious conflict, mass violence, and corrupt leadership. In 1999 I led an IRI election observation delegation to observe the historic democratic elections in Nigeria. In that key country today, IRI is working with Nigerian political parties to prepare for upcoming elections and to encourage the increased participation of women in the political process. IRI also conducted, along with the National Democratic Institute and the International Foundation for Election Systems, a pre-election political assessment of Angola, a country that may be starting to make democratic progress from a savage civil conflict. A current program in Burundi is providing training and support to a legislature struggling to move forward after a genocide of horrific proportions and ongoing violent unrest that threatens the stability of the entire Great Lakes region. In these constantly changing political landscapes, IRI continues to work in innovative ways to address democratic priorities. For example, building on several years of successful training with local government in South Africa's young democracy, IRI is now constructing a program which will strengthen a local government and community-level response to the AIDS epidemic, a national crisis which threatens both development and democratic stability. By working to foster strong democratic institutions, transparency and accountability in government, and political empowerment at the grassroots level, institutions such as IRI promote international political stability and further the ideals of democratic freedom throughout the world.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my condolences to the family and friends of Samatha Runnion, and to all those who have been affected by her tragic murder. Samantha was abducted from her home in Stanton, California, on Monday, July 15. She was sexually assaulted and murdered, and her body was found the next day in Cleveland National Forest. President George W. Bush has called on Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller to order that all federal resources necessary be made available to the Orange County sheriff's office. Rewards totaling more than $100,000 have been offered by British Petroleum, which employs Samantha's mother, the Coalition of Police and Sheriffs in Santa Ana and others. What happened to Samantha is deeply disturbing. Why does something like this have to happen to an innocent child? We shouldn't have to keep children off the streets. They should be allowed to go out and play, without fear of such horrendous acts. Parents shouldn't have to worry about their children disappearing the moment they turn their backs. Sadly, the television has recently been strewn with alarming news of missing children like Samantha, Elizabeth Smart, Jahi Turner, and others. We hope that justice will be served, but even finding those accountable gives just a slightly cathartic feeling after such a huge loss. Our hearts go out to Samantha's family, the families of these other children, and anyone else feeling the pain of losing a child.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, one of the points I was going to make was that prior to the passage of our CAARTA bill, during a Committee on Financial Services meeting, I asked the SEC chairman if the SEC had all of the tools that it needed to return the ill-gotten gains from dishonest executives to the shareholders of these companies. His response was that it would be helpful if Congress were to include language that made it clear that it is Congress's intent that the SEC have the power to return these stolen funds to the shareholders. Now, the Federal Account for Investor Restitution language, as proposed by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), would effectively accomplish this task. Now, currently, the Securities and Exchange Commission has the power to disgorge these funds from corrupt managers. However, the funds rarely make it back to the shareholders who deserve them. They are currently distributed in an ad hoc fashion. I would say less than 20 percent are returned to the shareholders today, with the rest going to the plaintiffs, attorneys' fees, and to the Treasury's general revenue. So this proposal that is offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) to the conference would ensure that all of these ill-gotten gains be returned to the people who deserve them, and that is the individual shareholders and pension investors who were bilked out of their money through corporate malfeasance. It is another reason why we need to move forward with that conference.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and to pay tribute to U.S. Army Ranger LTC Richard ``Tex'' Wandke (Ret) of Cypress, CA, on his induction into the Ranger Hall of Fame for exceptional valor and honor throughout his distinguished 25-year military career. In 1963, LTC Wandke graduated as the Distinguished Military Student from the University of Maine, then went on to complete Ranger school and was assigned as a platoon leader for the Fourth Infantry Division. He then volunteered to serve his country in Vietnam, and was assigned as an advisor to the 43rd Vietnamese Ranger Battalion. During, his service, LTC Wandke earned various honors for his actions in combat, including two Silver Stars, the Legion of Merit, Three Bronze Stars and Three Purple Hearts. He also earned the Distinguished Service Cross through his valorous conduct in commanding his company on a search and destroy mission in Vietnam on May 27, 1969. When one of the rifle squads under his command surprised seven enemy soldiers and opened fire, hostile reinforcements soon arrived in huge numbers and unleashed tremendous firepower on his company's perimeter. LTC Wandke rallied his men to break the enemy assault, and then directed all of the able men under his command to establish a landing zone to evacuate the wounded. Although wounded himself, LTC Wandke stayed behind to protect the dead and critically wounded, and prevented the enemy from overrunning his position. Since retiring from active service in 1988, LTC Wandke has been teaching high school ROTC. He is also active in several veterans organizations and was the National commander of the Legion of Valor from 1995-1996. Through his service both on the battlefield and off, he has exemplified the Ranger Creed: Rangers Lead the Way! Mr. Speaker, I can think of no individual more deserving of inclusion in the Ranger Hall of Fame than LTC Richard ``Tex'' Wandke. I believe that every American owes LTC Wandke a debt of gratitude, and that he is a singularly excellent role model for all Rangers. I congratulate him on his impressive accomplishment and encourage him to continue his service to the community.