John Tanner

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Two hundred and thirty years ago, Americans threw off the yoke of the British monarch with much fanfare, as everyone knows. But, since then, the American people have celebrated the royals, and they have watched and observed the demeanor of the royal family of Great Britain throughout the years. As a matter of fact, we gave a coveted film award to a woman portraying the Queen just not long ago. But, anyway, a few short weeks ago, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, were greeted by enormous crowds visiting the United States. This was the Queen's fourth State visit following previous visits in 1991, 1976 and first in 1957. Her most recent trip was highlighted by her commemoration of the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown, the first permanent English settlement in the New World. When 108 London entrepreneurs set sail on orders from King James I to settle Virginia, that would set the stage for one of the most, if not the most, successful and lasting alliance in modern history. The Queen praised such historic links and bonds of friendship between our two countries when she was here and referred to the fact that our relationship has been built on a shared commitment to democratic traditions and liberty. During her visit, she also noted, as well, our shared future. Just as the settlers of 1607 set out to discover a new world, researchers on both sides of the Atlantic are now seeking to explore new frontiers in medicine and space. This collaboration between British and American scientists is invaluable. The Queen has served tirelessly as an ambassador for the British people, and she has led her country through times of prosperity as well as times of turmoil. It is for these reasons and others that I am delighted to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 422) calling on the Government of the People's Republic of China to use its unique influence and economic leverage to stop genocide and violence in Darfur, Sudan.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and yield myself as much time as I may consume. Six days ago, the President imposed a new series of sanctions on the Sudanese government and its murderous leaders. The administration may have sent a stronger message a month ago, but did not. But new American sanctions, however belatedly imposed, are in place. Now the rest of the civilized world must respond. Strong sanctions represent a crucial bridge in efforts to force the regime in Khartoum to give up its reprehensible program of genocide in Darfur. But it is now readily apparent that we can only cross that bridge with the help of China. Time and again, we have witnessed national interests taking precedence over the destruction of people's lives, their society and their culture. China, purely for economic interests, in our opinion, has stood firmly in the way of a robust international response to the Darfur genocide. It has been 3 years since this Congress declared that the unfolding atrocities in Darfur constitute genocide. Yet, since it began, China has acted as a shield for Sudan against international criticism and tough sanctions at the United Nations. In spite of unimpeachable evidence of genocide and other atrocities, China has continued as Sudan's largest trading partner and the main foreign investor in its oil sector. China's sales of arms and military equipment to Khartoum is even more disturbing. But China has taken it one step further by actually blocking efforts to send international forces into Darfur. Several countries have been resistant. But among the states unwilling to support a robust civilian protection operation to stop the genocide, China assumes a unique culpability because of its influence, its permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, and its role in Sudan. In 2004, China forced the Security Council to water down an oil sanctions resolution and threatened it would veto any future resolutions sanctioning Sudan. China shielded Khartoum against international sanctions while the Sudanese military drove tens of thousands out of their communities and oil regions just to speed exploration. In 2006, China explicitly argued to the Security Council against a peacekeeping deployment to Darfur, arguing that it could not support the resolution because Sudan's government was not yet ready to accept U.N. peacekeepers on its soil. Not only did China oppose the deployment on behalf of Sudan, its Ambassador lobbied hard for the Russians to take the same position. Only under relentless international pressure, with the actress Mia Farrow and others raising the specter that the upcoming Beijing Olympics will become the ``Genocide Olympics,'' has China finally begun to take a few small, constructive steps in the right direction on Sudan. If we are going to save lives in Darfur, it is imperative that we keep the pressure on China to force Sudan to end the atrocities, resume peace talks and bring resolution to the horror known as Darfur. This very important resolution calls on China to condemn explicitly the atrocities in Darfur, to cease military arms sales, to suspend economic cooperation with Sudan and use its influence to urge President Bashir to comply with full and immediate deployment of the African Union peacekeeping force. It also calls on all parties to the conflict to adhere to the ceasefire agreement and allow unfettered access by humanitarian workers to those in need. It's a clear signal to China and Sudan that their relationship cannot and will not withstand the glare of international scrutiny. Unless it wants to permanently scar its reputation, China must act as a responsible world power and use its influence to stop this now. I therefore urge passage and commend the author, my friend and colleague, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, for her tireless leadership on the Darfur issue. Let me also thank our majority leader, Steny Hoyer, for his consistent and effective efforts to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the author of the resolution, Ms. Barbara Lee of California.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to yield 2 minutes to Ms. Shelley Berkley of Nevada.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize Mr. Steve Israel from New York for 2 minutes.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I now am proud to yield the floor to Mr. George Miller from California for 2 minutes.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time we have?

Mr. TANNER. I am pleased to yield to the author of the resolution our remaining time.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 430) calling on the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to immediately release Dr. Haleh Esfandiari, as amended.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution and yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, just a few short months ago, a remarkably accomplished Iranian American woman, Dr. Haleh Esfandiari, made a decision that any of us would make under a similar circumstance. Her 93-year-old mother was failing and she needed to visit her in Tehran without delay. She boarded a flight to Iran, completely unsuspecting of what would unfold. After a visit with her ailing mother, Dr. Esfandiari reached the Tehran airport. As one of the leading Middle East scholars in the United States at the highly respected Woodrow Wilson Institute, she had no reason to believe she was about to encounter trouble. But on her way to the airport, she was attacked by plain-clothed, knife- wielding thugs and her passport was stolen. This was only the beginning of her nightmare. Iranian authorities refused to grant her a new passport. She was interrogated and put under house arrest. She was told she would not return to the United States. And the ordeal grew worse. Dr. Esfandiari, a slender woman of 67 years, has been detained without just cause ever since, under the outlandish pretense of being an enemy of Iran. And, ominously, late last month she was formally charged with espionage. She now sits in Iran's notorious Evin Prison. She has been allowed to make but a few painfully brief phone calls to her family. She has been interrogated at excruciating length. At the height of absurdity, she has been pressured to acknowledge participation in some kind of alleged coup against the Iranian government. This type of effort at forced confession is beyond absurd. It goes to the heart of the injustice of the Iranian regime. Despite quiet initiatives of diplomacy undertaken by many countries, organizations, and individuals on Dr. Esfandiari's behalf and frustrated by her audacious commitment to the truth, the Iranian security services have done what they know best, and that is arrest without cause. In discussing Dr. Esfandiari's case, news articles have also cited at least four other cases of dual Iranian American citizens deplorably being detained in Iran for no justifiable reason. It is particularly worrisome that two of these detainees, like Dr. Esfandiari, have now been charged with espionage. Oddly enough, what all of these five seem to have in common is a commitment to U.S.-Iranian engagement. The government of Iran has unjustly detained five American citizens without due legal process. And Mr. Van Hollen's resolution today aptly expresses the serious concern we have on their behalf and our justifiable demand that they be released without delay. These outrageous arrests are indicative of the blatant excesses and obvious shortcomings of the Iranian political system, too much tyranny and too little rule of law. This is a matter of basic human rights, and we cannot allow the Iranian government to continue trampling on the fundamental liberties of our citizens in this manner. Ten Iranian parliamentarians have recently formed a Parliamentarian American friendship group. I call on these parliamentarians and all Iranians of good will, all people of good will, to use whatever influence they have to help bring about the immediate release of all American citizens in Iran who are held so unjustly and against their will. I commend my friend and colleague from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) for introducing this important measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), the author of the resolution.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I have no more requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Screaming Eagles of the 101st Airborne Division of the United States Army, based at Fort Campbell, a portion of which I am honored to represent in this chamber. This week marks the biennial celebration known as ``The Week of the Eagles,'' when we acknowledge the immeasurable contributions to our country from the current, veteran and fallen members of the 101st Airborne Division and their families, all of whom have made great personal sacrifices in service to our Nation. The inspiration for the book and television mini-series ``The Band of Brothers,'' the Screaming Eagles have historically played prominent roles in World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam and Desert Storm. They were instrumental in successes in Operation Anaconda, a tough early front in the War on Terrorism in Afghanistan. They have also answered the call of duty repeatedly to serve in Iraq, and many of these courageous men and women will deploy to Iraq again later this year. The tradition of ``The Week of the Eagles'' began in 1973 when the Screaming Eagles returned home from the Vietnam War and held a community festival to showcase the division's combat readiness. The celebration was resurrected in 1996 by 101st Airborne Division Commander Major General William Kernan to remember those service members who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to the United States Army. We now celebrate ``The Week of the Eagles'' biennially to both honor the fallen troops and their families and showcase the readiness of the 101st Airborne's mighty combat units. I trust that, even if there is healthy difference of opinion among some of our colleagues and the international community about the civilian leadership of the United States Armed Forces, every member of this body supports those families who are bravely serving our country and is proud of the families of the 101st Airborne Division, whose efforts throughout the division's long and storied history have served our country well. Madam Speaker, I join you and our colleagues in the House of Representatives in honoring the 101st Airborne Division, thanking the Screaming Eagles and their families for their dedication and patriotism, remembering those 101st Airborne members who have given their lives in service to our country, and recognizing ``The Week of the Eagles.''

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join our colleagues in congratulating the University of Tennessee Lady Volunteers for their 2007 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship. This team, under the leadership of head coach Pat Summitt, made Tennesseans proud with their victory over the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. Coach Summitt, the winningest coach either men's or women's basketball, continues to lead some of the finest student athletes in the country. The 2006-2007 Lady Vols team included Nicky Anosike, Alberta Auguste, Shannon Bobbitt, Elizabeth Curry, Alex Fuller, Alex Hornbuckle, Cait McMahan, Candace Parker, Dominique Redding and Sidney Spencer, led by Summitt, assistant head coach Holly Warlick and assistants Nikki Caldwell and Dean Lockwood. This group of dedicated players and coaches played magnificently throughout this entire basketball season and certainly earned their championship title. These young women are shining examples of loyalty, dedication and teamwork. Mr. Speaker, I am an alumnus of the University of Tennessee and the UT basketball program, and am proud to be an avid fan of Tennessee Lady Vol basketball. I joined many orange-and-white-clad Tennesseans April 3 watching as the Lady Volunteers captured their seventh NCAA championship in the last 20 years. These successful student athletes bring honor to themselves and the University of Tennessee. I am proud to support this resolution and thank you and our colleagues for taking the time to recognize our Lady Vols.

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, well, thank you very much. I wanted to come tonight and join with my colleague, Mr. Ross. I heard what you have been saying and I wish this was not true, but all one has to do is go to the Web site of the U.S. Treasury and see for one's self how much money has been borrowed in the last 60 months from foreign sources, and I heard you address that point earlier. I want to talk about a bill that we introduced last Congress that the Blue Dogs endorsed and that we hope to introduce in the next few days in this Congress; and hopefully we can pass it this time. It has to do with the subject of, the theme of tonight's Special Order with regard to accountability. And this is not a Democrat or Republican bill. A lot of times these Special Orders are utilized by people who want to come and blast the Democrats, if they are Republicans, or Democrats who want to blast the Republicans on the other side, and that is not what this floor is for. Politics should end here. We all represent people in this country in a public office and, therefore, all of us represent not political parties in our jobs here but citizens of this country. This accountability bill that I want to talk about for just a few minutes, if I may, has to do with demanding that those whom we appropriate money to, any administration, Democrat, Republican, does not matter, actually manage the money so that we at least know where it goes. We may disagree as to how it is spent, but we at least, as public officials, ought to have the responsibility for ourselves and those whom we represent to understand and appreciate what it is going for. We have here in Washington, the Congress has, an organization called the GAO, General Accountability Office. The GAO is charged with the responsibility, as a nonpolitical branch of the government, to audit, among other things, other responsibilities, audit the various Federal agencies to see what they are doing with the money that we remove from people's pockets involuntarily. And I heard you mention tax day earlier. Today is tax day. We remove the money involuntarily from the taxpayers, the citizens of this country, and then we appropriate to an administration, any administration. Well, the GAO does audits as part of their responsibility, and they have reported to us that 18 of 24 Federal agencies could not produce an acceptable audit in fiscal year 2005, which is the latest figures that we have. Now, there is no private enterprise in America that could withstand that kind of either sloppy bookkeeping on the one hand, to be charitable about it, sloppy bookkeeping, or out-and-out negligence, incompetence, fraud, whatever one wishes to call it. Eighteen of 24 could not do that. So last year, we, the Blue Dogs, designed a bill that said when that happens, when the Inspector General of any department or the GAO identifies any element or any agency of the Federal Government that cannot tell us what they did with the money that we removed from people involuntarily in the form of taxation and appropriated to them, this bill would provide that within 60 days Congress must, by law, hold a hearing to determine why it is they cannot account for the money that was appropriated to them or, in the alternative, if they cannot account for it, then it is simple: They do not get it. That makes eminent sense to me as a businessperson at home in Tennessee. I cannot imagine going to the comptroller or the treasurer of our business and saying, here is an expenditure of X amount of dollars, what did you do with it, and they would respond, I do not know, I cannot tell you what happened to that. That would not be acceptable in any private enterprise in this country, and it should not be acceptable here in the public domain because it is all of our moneys that we are talking about, 18 of 24. The other aspect of this bill is, in government talk, when the GAO identifies a high-risk program, what they mean is the program is being mismanaged, number one; or two, it is not doing what Congress intended it to do when the law was passed. Pretty simple. It is either the program is not working or they cannot tell us what they did with the money. In either event, Congress ought to hold a public hearing so the people of this country know that this program is either not working or that it is being so badly mismanaged, by again any administration, that we need to stop the spending. I hope as we move through this Congress that we will be able to actually enhance and improve on it; not only that, but actually pass it into law. It needs to be done. It has everything to do with the trust that the American people have placed in us when they voted for us to come here to this arena to transact their business on their behalf. One of the things I like so much about the Blue Dogs is that we have this quaint belief that the voting card that all of us possess as Members of Congress belongs not to either party leadership but to the people who hired us. That is, I believe, what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created the People's House. And so, therefore, when we have all this talk about partisan politics here, it really has nothing to do with the philosophy of the Blue Dogs in that we believe we ought to work for the people that hired us, and that is the people in our respective districts who have every right to expect that when we come here. We will not only be guardians of the country in terms of funding what is necessary for national defense, and we are very strong on that, as you know, but we also will try as best we can individually and collectively as a body to see that the moneys that are being spent are being spent in the best possible way. I gave a talk at home over the Easter recess, and I told them, I said there are two things that are being witnessed here by this unbelievable not only spending spree, but borrowing spree that has gone on around here for the last 60 months. We have transferred so much of our Nation's treasure to interest, for which we get nothing, that we are degrading basically the tax base to the point where I am afraid in the future our country will not be able to make the two investments that I believe are necessary for our Nation's security. One is in the area of infrastructure. One only need go to any country on the planet where there is no infrastructure, no highways, roads, bridges, water, sewer, all of the things that private enterprise in this country can build around to create the economic opportunity, the jobs, to create the commerce that will result in further tax receipts for more investment, whether it be for water and sewer and highways, airports, bridges, roads, tunnels, anything like that, to see that the government must make those investments so that private enterprise can prosper. Nobody is prospering in these countries. We call them Third World countries, but they are nonetheless countries where there is no infrastructure. Nobody is doing any good because there is nothing to build around to create the economic activity, the commerce that must go on to make things happen. And so we are degrading our tax base by this interest that we are now paying, for which we get nothing. The second thing is human capital. From my reading of history, there is no country in the history of civilization and mankind, or humankind, that has been able to maintain itself as a strong and free country with an unhealthy, uneducated population. We are beginning to see the budget being cut in areas where, number one, we have to have public education because all of us, as American citizens, are charged with the responsibility not only for ourselves and our families, but we are charged with making decisions for our cities, counties, State and country. Without public education for the literally millions of kids who may not get that in their homes, because of various economic factors and otherwise, we have to educate our citizens. Thomas Jefferson said it as well as anybody. The other thing is health care. We are going to be taking up SCHIP, it is called, which is basically children's health insurance. We cannot afford in this country, in my view, to leave it better than when we found it with unhealthy, uneducated children, and so what we are trying to do is stop this ever-increasing encroachment on the tax base of interest so that we are rendered unable as citizens to do the things necessary to keep our country competitive in an increasingly globalized world. This is not just a hope. It is a necessity, in my view, that we be able to do that. So, as we talk about fiscal responsibility, we talk about this unbelievable borrowing that is taking place, what we are really talking about is balancing the budget, not for the sake of balancing the budget, but for the sake of stopping an ever-increasing encroachment on the tax base for which we get nothing. Last year, this country sent overseas $145 billion thereabouts. That is almost seven times as much as the so-called foreign aid bill. I do not particularly like the way we do that, but at least one can make some strategic decisions about money that is being appropriated in the foreign aid bill in terms of whether or not it will advance the interests of the United States in a given part of the world. Interest checks, on the other hand, just go to whoever bought our debt. That is a huge difference, and it is one I hope that people will relate to, understand, appreciate and hold dear when they make the decisions that they make with regard to who ought to be running our United States Congress. Again, this bill basically does not address who controls the Congress or who controls the White House. It simply says that all of us who come here as public servants ought to have that kind of responsibility to oversee and to look after the moneys that are removed from people's pockets involuntarily in the form of taxation and appropriated to any administration. I think, and I am glad that the Blue Dogs share that philosophy and share that opinion, because oftentimes, all you hear coming from these microphones is, well, the Republicans are worse than the Democrats, the Democrats are worse than the Republicans, and they did it to us, so we will do it to them. That is not getting us anywhere. We have much more serious matters to discuss, and we ought to be talking about it in this Special Order. Tonight is one opportunity. I want to thank you again for allowing me this time to talk about these, I think, critical matters that affect us all. There is no Democrat or Republican; we are all Americans. As Americans, we are not doing what we ought to do to do the things that I heard Allen Boyd talk about awhile ago about what our parents taught us: one, live within your means; two, pay your debts; three, invest in the future. Unfortunately, we haven't been doing any of those, and it's going to catch up with us at some point if we don't reverse it. We are trying, we need help doing it, but we are going to keep plugging away at it. I am very proud of this Special Order that you put together. I am actually really proud of the work that the Blue Dogs are doing.

Mr. TANNER. That is according to the GAO. There were six that were compliant with the Federal management, financial management law. Commerce, Labor, the EPA, the National Science Foundation, the Office of Personnel Management, and the Social Security Administration. The ones who were not were Agriculture, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Justice, Interior, State, Transportation, Treasury, Veterans Affairs, Agency for International Development, General Services Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Small Business Administration. There may be valid reasons why they could not tell us what they did, but we ought to have a hearing and find out what those reasons are. If they need help to correct it, and legislation to do so, then we at least would know that; and we could begin to work on that to try to correct this problem. But to ignore it is, in my judgment, an act of irresponsibility by the Congress and by the administration.

Mr. TANNER

Mr. TANNER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 494) to endorse further enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and to facilitate the timely admission of new members to NATO, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.