Ed Towns

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Lewis A. Watkins, Sr. for his dedication to serving his community and the City of New York. For almost 30 years, Lewis has worked for the City of New York in a variety of administrative positions. During most of that time, he has also dedicated himself to serving Community Planning Board #3 in Bedford Stuyvesant, which represents the largest African-American community in New York City. Educated, diligent and committed, he was promoted from Youth Coordinator for the district to District Manager of Community Board #3. Mr. Watkins' primary role is to coordinate the delivery of city services and to advise a Board of 50 members who are appointed by the Brooklyn Borough President and City Council Members. In this capacity, he works with residents, block associations, community-based and civic organizations, businesses, and churches in order to best serve the neighborhood. For issues in Bedford Stuyvesant relating to housing, seniors, health care, parks, child welfare, day care, education, transportation, police, fire, environmental protection and economic development, Lewis is the main source of information for the City and plays a key role in solving problems for the community related to these areas. Lewis received his Master of Science Degree in Secondary Education with a Minor in Urban Policy Science from State University of New York at Stony Brook University. He taught high school for several years but realizes now that city government has been his true calling. In retrospect, he also realizes that his inspiration for community services came from his role models, his mother, Bernice Watkins and his maternal grandmother. Mr. Speaker, Lewis A. Watkins has been a dedicated public servant to his community. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition. I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in honoring this truly remarkable individual.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Darlene Mealy for her commitment to public service and dedication to serving her community. Darlene Mealy was one of eight children born to Edward and Louise Mealy, in Detroit, MI. She was raised in Brooklyn, NY, and would later attend school at Manhattan Borough Community College. While living on Herkimer St. in 1987, she formed a softball team named the ``Bullets,'' which won three straight championships. Since then, Darlene decided she wanted to be in a position where she would be able to give back to the community that gave her so much. She is the founder and president of FARR (Fulton St./Atlantic Ave./ Ralph./Rochester Ave.) Community Association, Inc. FARR has helped forge tighter community bonds and a stronger voice. FARR's successes include removing drug dealers from street corners, beautifying the neighborhood, and saving eight members' homes from demolition, which was planned for by the Fulton Park Urban Renewal Plan. Under her leadership, FARR also has been credited with programs for our youth, such as boys' and girls' basketball and girls' step teams, which she has coached for three years. Her community involvement also extends to her service on the executive board of the Bishop Henry B. Hucles Episcopal Nursing Home, providing an essential service to frail, elderly and physically challenged community residents. She is the corresponding secretary for the 81st Precinct Community Council and a member of the Christ Memorial Church in Brooklyn. She was the former secretary of Unity Democratic Club as well. She credits her mother as her role model in learning values that she lives by today. Professionally, Darlene has worked for the New York City Transit for 13 years. She now works in the Department of Buses and Technical Services. She is on the executive board of Neighborhood Housing Services that gives homeowners low and moderate loans to improve their homes. Mr. Speaker, Darlene Mealy's commitment, leadership, innovation, and motivation have brought about a positive change in the neighborhood and community she serves diligently. As such, she is more than worthy of receiving our recognition. I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in honoring this truly remarkable individual.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, the International Sikh Organization held its annual convention on the weekend of October 10-11-12, 2003, in Houston. The convention laid plans for the expansion of the movement to free Khalistan, the Sikh homeland that declared its independence on October 7, 1987. The convention was attended by many delegates from all around the United States and Canada. They made plans to expand their office in Washington, which has been an invaluable resource to us here in Congress in getting out information about the oppression of the Sikhs and other minorities by the Indian government. This is good to see. The glow of freedom still burns brightly in the hearts of these Sikh leaders. The delegates also congratulated Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the International Sikh Organization and the Council of Khalistan, for his tireless work in support of the interests of Sikhs in this country and the cause of freedom for Khalistan. I can say from my personal experience that Dr. Aulakh has worked for that cause with great dedication for several years and he has provided a lot of information to those of us in Congress who are interested in the cause of human rights and freedom in South Asia. Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to take this opportunity to salute the International Sikh Organization on a very successful convention and wish it continued success in the future. We can support its efforts to bring freedom to the Sikh people, as well as the other captive nations of South Asia such as Nagaland, Kashmir, and others, by stopping American aid and trade with India until human rights are observed and by declaring our support for a fair plebiscite under international monitoring on the question of independence. I would like to place the ISO's press release on its very successful convention into the Record at this time. Annual Convention on Khalistan Very Successful--Plans To Strengthen Office Formulated Washington, D.C., October 14, 2003--The annual convention of the International Sikh Organization on Khalistan was very successful. Delegates from all around the United States and Canada attended. The convention was held October 10-11-12 in Houston, Texas. The convention recognized Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the International Sikh Organization and the Council of Khalistan, for his dedication, vision, persistence, and commitment to the cause of liberating Khalistan, the independent Sikh homeland declared on October 7, 1987. Since then, it has been under Indian occupation. When India became independent, Sikhs were equal partners in the transfer of power and were to receive their own state, but the weak and ignorant Sikh leaders of the time were tricked into staying with India on the promise that they would have ``the glow of freedom'' and no law affecting the Sikhs would pass without their consent. Sikhs ruled an independent and sovereign Punjab from 1710 to 1716 and again from 1765 to 1849. No Sikh representative has ever signed the Indian constitution. The Council of Khalistan is the government pro tempore of Khalistan. At the convention Dr. Bakshish Singh Sandhu of Pennsylvania and Sardar Harjinder Singh of New Jersey offered to spearhead the acquisition of a building in Washington, D.C. to house the International Sikh Organization's offices. The delegates emphasized the need for an office in Washington to protect the interests of Sikhs in this country, as well as to work for freedom for Khalistan. An example of this need is the video recently removed from the State Department website entitled ``Terrorism: A War Without Borders'' which portrayed all Sikhs as terrorists. Because of the letter by U.S. Representatives Dan Burton (R-Ind.), Edolphus Towns (D-NY), and Wally Herger (R-Cal.), the State Department recently removed this video and its text from its website. The convention passed a resolution of appreciation of these Congressmen. Other resolutions included one asking every Gurdwara to contribute $500 per month to the Washington office, one urging Sikhs not to support the various branches of the Akali Dal, which is under Indian government control, one calling for young Sikhs to step forward into leadership roles, and one demanding freedom for Khalistan. History shows that multinational states such as India are doomed to failure. Countries like Austria-Hungary, India's longtime friend the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and others prove this point. India is not one country; it is a polyglot like those countries, thrown together for the convenience of the British colonialists. It is doomed to break up as they did. India is ruled by Hindu theocrats whose agenda is ``Hindu, Hindi, Hindutva, Hindu Rashtra,'' or total Hindu domination of every facet of Indian life. An Indian Cabinet minister said that everyone who lives in India must be a Hindu or subservient to Hindus. ``We thank everyone who attended this important convention,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``Their commitment, their ideas and their support are helpful as we move forward in our work to protect the interests of Sikhs in this country and to continue working for the liberation of Khalistan,'' he said. ``We sincerely thank and appreciate the hospitality of the Management Committee of the Houston Gurdwara. Special thanks are due to the Council advisors of the Houston area.'' The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984, more than 200,000 Christians since 1948, over 85,000 Muslims in Kashmir since 1988, and tens of thousands of Tamils, Assamese, Manipuris, Dalits, and others. The Indian Supreme Court called the Indian government's murders of Sikhs ``worse than a genocide.'' Indian police arrested human-rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra after he exposed their policy of mass cremation of Sikhs, in which over 50,000 Sikhs have been arrested, tortured, and murdered, then their bodies were declared unidentified and secretly cremated. He was murdered in police custody. His body was not given to his family. The police never released the body of former Jathedar of the Akal Takht Gurdev Singh Kaunke after SSP Swaran Singh Ghotna murdered him. Ghotna has never been brought to trial for the Jathedar Kaunke murder. No one has been brought to justice for the kidnapping and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalra. According to a report by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR), 52,268 Sikhs are being held as political prisoners in India without charge or trial. Some have been in illegal custody since 1984!

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, the International Sikh Organization held its annual convention on the weekend of October 10-11-12, 2003 in Houston. The convention laid plans for the expansion of the movement to free Khalistan, the Sikh homeland that declared its independence on October 7, 1987. The convention was attended by many delegates from all around the United States and Canada. They made plans to expand their office in Washington, which has been an invaluable resource to us here in Congress in getting out information about the oppression of the Sikhs and other minorities by the Indian government. This is good to see. The glow of freedom still burns brightly in the hearts of these Sikh leaders. The delegates also congratulated Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the International Sikh Organization and the Council of Khalistan, for his tireless work in support of the interests of Sikhs in this country and the cause of freedom for Khalistan. I can say from my personal experience that Dr. Aulakh has worked for that cause with great dedication for several years and he has provided a lot of information to those of us in Congress who are interested in the cause of human rights and freedom in South Asia. Mr. Speaker, I would simply like to take this opportunity to salute the International Sikh Organization on a very successful convention and wish it continued success in the future. We can support its efforts to bring freedom to the Sikh people, and other regions in South Asia by insisting that human rights are observed and by declaring our support for a free and fair plebiscite under international monitoring on the question of independence.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Hugh Errol Boston for his accomplishments in the business world for which he has received the Thomas R. Fortune Business Award. Hugh was born to Mr. & Mrs. Samuel and Ruth Boston of Bush Lot, Essequibo, Guyana. Hugh, the fourth of seven children, immigrated to the United States of America in December 1974. He attended the Anna Regina Primary School and then continued his education by attending Burnette High School. After graduation, Hugh Errol became a member of the Guyana Police Force, where he was employed for four years. Throughout his years in America, Hugh worked in various enterprises including the construction industry. He also worked at Pfizer Pharmaceuticals as a Quality Control Inspector and a mailroom supervisor at Philip Holtzer and Associates. However, Hugh never lost sight of his goal to establish himself as an entrepreneur. He would eventually realize his goal, opening Boston Shipping Enterprises at 506 Decatur Street, Brooklyn, NY. He is committed to giving back to the community and has followed his motto of ``making a difference in anyone's life,'' to assist whenever possible. This is demonstrated by his numerous contributions to his community. He built a Church in honor of his mother at Bush Lot in Guyana where he sponsors a Vacation Bible School every summer, providing meals and organizing field trips. He also distributes toys to children at the community block party near his residence. Additionally, he offers part-time employment to youngsters who live within the vicinity of his business. Hugh is married and is the proud father of four daughters. Mr. Speaker, Hugh Errol Boston has achieved his life ambition in establishing his own business and has used his success to give back to his community. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition. I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in honoring this truly remarkable individual.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Roy King for his dedication to his community which has earned him the Thomas R. Fortune Exemplary Service Award. Roy was born in Georgia and at the age of 6 months he and his family moved to Far Rockaway, NY, where he still resides. Roy attended public elementary school and junior high schools and graduated from Far Rockaway High School. After high school, he attended Queens Borough Community College, receiving a degree in physical education. As someone who loves to be around children, Roy applied for a position in security and was hired by the New York City Board of Education where he worked for several years. In 1977, Roy was hired as a counselor for the New York City Department of Social Services--Youth Division where he still works as a child care specialist at the Atlantic Diagnostic Center. Roy was introduced to the Unity Democratic Club by J.J. Johnson, where he also is an active member of the Men's Council. He has been a member of St. John Baptist Church in Rockaway Beach, NY for over 20 years where Elder J.D. Williams is the Pastor. He is a faithful member of the Usher Board and the Men's Ministry. With his wife Anne, Roy has a beautiful home in Rockaway Beach, where they are raising three girls and two grandchildren. All his children and other children around him call him ``Pa Pa''. Roy feels blessed to have his mother and five siblings living in the Far Rockaway area as well. Mr. Speaker, Roy King has shown that he is committed to his community through both his professional choices and participation in the Unity Democratic Club. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition. I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in honoring this truly remarkable individual.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Hamilton Pascal for his accomplishments in the business world for which he has earned the Thomas R. Fortune Business Award. Hamilton was born and raised in Trinidad where he attended public elementary school and later, Burke High School. After graduating from Burke High School, he went on to obtain his license in Electrical Installation from Victoria Institute. In 1976, Hamilton came to the United States and settled in Brooklyn, New York. He decided that he wanted to further his education in building maintenance and repairs, obtaining his license as a real estate salesperson. Wanting to become more involved in civic affairs and learn more about politics in the United States, Hamilton became a member of Unity Democratic Club in the early 1990's. By joining Unity Democratic Club, he became involved with the Men's Council and took an active role in several of the activities held by UDC. For the future, Hamilton is planning to own a home improvement store along with his son Eric Pascal, who currently resides with him. Mr. Speaker, Hamilton Pascal has worked to improve his business skills and has shown a genuine interest in becoming actively involved in his community. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition. I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in honoring this truly remarkable individual.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chairman, I stand today to state my continued opposition to the funding of our invasion and occupation of Iraq. Some of my colleagues have mourned the apparent death of U.S. domestic policy. They have detailed what this $87 billion could provide in this country. If we pass this bill, every person in this country will lose services in education, healthcare, housing, veterans programs, homeland security and social security. This is a fact. Other colleagues have come to this floor to question our entry into the war, our standing in the world community, our ability to govern an occupied nation and our exit strategy. The Administration has never revealed plans which indicate when we will have done enough, committed enough resources, or restored enough of the infrastructure to leave Iraq. It is strange that a country like America, born out of a desire to shake off British colonialism may now be engaging in a new era of imperialism. I align myself with those who have expressed doubts about the short-term consequence and the long-term wisdom of such a policy. And while I share those concerns, I am most concerned about the lack of accountability throughout this Iraqi adventure. We have already passed a $79 billion spending bill for the current conflict in Iraq. However, no one here knows how that money was spent. We do not have any accounting of the no-bid contracts, but we do know that the majority of our soldiers are wearing Vietnam era flak jackets. And while we talk about building an Iraqi democracy, we refuse to allow the Iraqis the ability to directly participate in the rebuilding of their own nation. We do know that the money is not getting to the soldiers and it is not getting to the people of Iraq. So we are obligated as good stewards of the hard-earned dollars of the American people to ask where is the money? Where has it gone and where will it go? No one from this Administration has bothered to answer and if they cannot answer this basic question of accountability, this body--which controls the purse strings--must keep the purse closed. Under the Constitution we have a duty to be responsible for governmental spending. Because this Administration has spent the budgetary surplus left by the Clinton Administration by providing $387 billion in tax cuts which primarily benefitted the wealthy, it is clear that the cost of this war can only be paid by borrowing money. My children's grandchildren will end up bearing the cost of this war. It would be irresponsible to saddle them with a $166 billion burden. I will not support this resolution. I cannot uphold my constitutional duties as a Member of this House while signing over a blank check to this Administration. It is wrong and your vote should reflect it. Vote no on this supplemental.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of our largest trading partners, the Republic of China on Taiwan. On October 10, Taiwan celebrated the 92nd anniversary of its National Day. I wish to join my colleagues in the United States Congress in sending best wishes to the twenty-two million residents of this lovely island nation. I also commend President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu as they continue to lead Taiwan to greater economic prosperity at home and greater participation in international activities abroad. Just like our 4th of July, October 10 marked the beginning of a fantastic story of economic, social and political success that has culminated in Taiwan becoming a vibrant democracy in the Pacific region. These are exciting times in the history of relations between the United States and Taiwan. Mr. Speaker, in commemoration of the 92nd occasion of the Republic of China's National Day, it is important to remember that Taiwan has a strong relationship with the United States, and we hope this relationship will continue to flourish and grow in the years to come.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Reverend Dr. W.J. Hall in recognition of his forty-two years of outstanding service as Pastor of the Bethel Baptist Church. Dr. Hall was born August 1, 1928 in Oxford, North Carolina, the only son of four children born to Mr. and Mrs. Grant A. Hall. After attending High School in Oxford, Dr. Hall studied at Temple University from 1947 to 1949. Following his academic work at Temple, he returned to North Carolina where he enlisted in the United States Army, attaining the rank of sergeant. Dr. Hall resumed his academic studies at Shaw University, graduating with an A.B degree in 1957. For the next two years, he earned 18 hours toward a master's degree while serving as the pastor of the Olive Grove Baptist church in Oxford and the Spring Street Baptist Church in Henderson, North Carolina. In 1961, Dr. Hall was called to the Bethel Baptist Church. Since then, he has completed a Master of Theology degree from the Virginia Seminary and College. Later, the College conferred upon Rev. Hall three honorary degrees including Doctor of Divinity in 1965, Doctor of Humane Letters in 1977, and a Doctor of Laws in 1982. Dr. Hall is widely recognized for his active civic involvement and several community accomplishments such as the Founder of the Self Help Council, the Omega Neighborhood Improvement Association of South Brooklyn, and chairman of the Bethel Baptist Day Care. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Baptist Educational Centers of Brooklyn and Long Island; the Board of Directors of the Bedford- Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation as well as the Chaplain of the New York City Housing Police and Past Protestant Chaplain of the Holy Family Hospital. Under the leadership of Dr. Hall, the Bethel Baptist Church has greatly increased its membership and is in the process of erecting a new three-story building adjacent to the church. Mr. Speaker, Reverend Dr. W.J. Hall has served his parishioners in exemplary fashion and has worked to improve the lives of everyone in his community for forty-two years. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition today and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring this truly remarkable person.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, a memorandum on Guatemala's many problems from the highly respected Washington-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) was placed in the Congressional Record. The following timely memorandum authored by William McIntire, a research fellow at COHA, is a continuation of COHA's analysis of the ominous situation in Guatemala. COHA, a non-partisan organization that has long been committed to addressing issues associated with human rights, democracy and economic justice throughout the Western Hemisphere, has been referred to by Senator Edward Kennedy a number of years ago as ``one of our Nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policymakers.'' White House Recertifies an Ill-Deserving Guatemala (By William B. McIntire, COHA Research Fellow) On Monday, September 15, the White House recommended to Congress that their certification of Guatemala, which was previously revoked due to failure of that country's authorities to be faithful allies in Washington's war on drugs, be renewed. This move, a stunning reversal of a Bush administration decision made last January to decertify for reasons of non-performance, qualifies the country to receive U.S. financial aid to fight drug traffickers. Applied to Guatemala, however, U.S. recertification remains a largely symbolic action as Washington waived all sanctions against Guatemala last January and never halted the flow of aid to that country. Guatemala will now, nevertheless, gain the prestige of being a U.S. ally when it comes to the drug war, when the whole process is actually a sham. Alongside similar actions against Burma and Haiti, the State Department's Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) announced its original decertification decision last January, which was a reflection on the escalating ineffectiveness of Guatemala's counter-narcotics efforts, as a result of President Alfonso Portillo's lackluster performance. The quantity of drugs seized by the Guatemalan government, which was rising annually until Portillo took office, plummeted in 2000 to only 13 percent of the amount seized the year before. In 2002 the Guatemalan police reportedly embezzled more than twice the quantity of drugs than they confiscated. The government's patently spurious commitment to the UN-brokered 1996 peace accords was also cited as a basis for Washington's decision to decertify last January. By its present action, the Bush administration graphically shows Latin America that when it comes to Washington's much touted war against drugs, there is no doubt that trade comes first. White House Hopes to Change Guatemala's Ways In his briefing on the president's certification determination, INL Acting Assistant Secretary Paul Simons observed that last year's ``suspension of assistance to Guatemala would result in further deterioration of precisely those Guatemalan institutions that are essential to combating the influence of organized crime.'' As a result, the State Department decided that, despite its decision to decertify Guatemala, financial sanctions that would normally accompany such a decision would not be exercised because they would only further undermine the country's already highly delicate democratic institutions. More directly, President Bush's decision to rescind last January's largely symbolic decertification will be an obvious effort to woo Guatemala, which has the region's largest population and economy, into supporting a Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). CAFTA is a prototype of Washington's Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) scheme, which has been one of its highest priorities, and because of Guatemala's economic significance, it is a prime target for Washington's courtship. As a result, Bush's drug war is being crucified on the cross of free trade. Thus, it comes as no surprise that the Bush administration would not permit a small matter like Guatemala's abysmal drug interdiction record of late to jeopardize the achievement of CAFTA. As negotiations for the trade pact continue, Washington has also received criticism for not pursuing strong labor and environmental regulations as part of its core. CAFTA: Is it Worth the Sacrifice? To the chagrin of some in Washington, Guatemala's Constitutional Court recently gave former dictator Efrain Rios Montt its blessing to run for the presidency despite a constitutional provision that bars all coup participants from doing so. Rios Montt rose to power during a military coup in March 1982 and promptly set about a ``scorched earth'' campaign, murdering thousands of Mayan peasants. U.S. Ambassador to Guatemala John R. Hamilton has publicly warned that U.S. relations with Guatemala would be compromised if Rios Montt made his way back to power. Still, in the face of reaching a free trade accord, the recertification of Guatemala reveals the true stripes of Washington's foreign policy, and the insignificance it accords to the anti-drug war and the rising human rights toll in Guatemala. In the name of Washington's free trade blitzkrieg, the White House has sacrificed the integrity of its professedly unwavering commitment to fight corruption and drugs in the very same Central American countries in which it allegedly endeavors to expand democracy, while promoting its all-important trade accord. More Holes Than Swiss Cheese in White House Recertification of Guatemala On Monday, September 15, the White House, using doctored information and skimpy statistics, recommended to Congress the recertification of Guatemala, reversing a Bush administration decision made last January in response to the dramatic evidence of Guatemala's failure to meaningfully cooperate with Washington's anti-drug efforts. Recertification would normally qualify the newly reaccredited country to receive U.S. financial aid. However, for Guatemala, it remains a largely symbolic action, since Washington originally had waived all sanctions against the country, maintaining the flow of bilateral aid in the interest of preserving what meager anti-narcotics operations that remain active in the country. Shortly after the original decertification, 21 members of the U.S. Congress asserted that, until Guatemala was recertified as the result of a dramatically improved drug interdiction record, they would not vote to ratify the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). In his Monday memorandum to the State Department President Bush, using self-obfuscating language, touted Guatemala's ``willingness to better its counternarcotics practices,'' but shied away from coming forth with any evidence to support it. Instead, the country was merely omitted from a section of the memorandum listing nations that had ``failed demonstrably . . . to adhere to their obligations under international counternarcotics agreements.'' Whereas Guatemala, Haiti and Myanmar had been blacklisted in January, only the latter two remained in the September 15 statement. The Bush administration, understandably sheepish when it came to recertifying Guatemala only months after decertifying it, and with no tangible evidence to justify doing so, camouflaged the announcement in the memorandum, hoping not to draw too much attention to its actions. The underhanded nature of this decision represents a massive downgrading of the authenticity of both Washington's and Guatemala's supposed anti-drug efforts. Guatemala would certainly not qualify for certification if actually put to even a minimally objective test. In making its determination, Washington proved once again that its certification process was little better than a total sham. A White House Deception Since the White House decertified Guatemala last January, the DEA observed that the country had become the ``preferred Central American location for storage and consolidation of drug loads,'' and boats and light aircraft regularly bring drugs into the country. The official White House report had to acknowledge that Guatemala's alleged improvements were only the ``initial steps'' that had to be taken and the ``permanence of these improvements had yet to be determined.'' In other words, no significant steps have been made to curtail the flow of narcotics through Guatemala. Meanwhile, the White House is concerned mainly with fulfilling its free trade aspirations in Central America and realizes that they would not likely be achieved if Guatemala remains uncertified. Thus ignoring the true deficiency of Guatemala's anti-drug efforts, the Bush administration is trying to slyly sweep its failed anti-drug campaign in the country under the rug, caricaturing the entire certification process just as the Clinton administration did with Mexico in 1997. As with the present Bush administration, free trade logistics, specifically the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), rather than a faithful evaluation of that country's anti-drug performance, were the order of the day. President Bush expects ``Guatemala to continue its efforts and to demonstrate further progress in the coming year,'' apparently hoping that recertification will self- prophetically lead to increased cooperation with his war on drugs, a trend he claims erroneously in the memorandum has already been manifest in the recent attitude of Guatemalan authorities. Interestingly, only hours before the White House announcement, Guatemalan officials announced that they had just seized record quantities of drugs, perhaps hoping to gull some ingenues into believing that interdictions had reacquired past levels. Suspiciously, no arrests had been made, nor statistics cited, to reinforce this claim. Some allege that previously seized drugs had been recycled and ``seized'' again to create the false pretense of successful interdiction. By spinning the facts of Guatemala's performance (pointing to the country's supposedly renewed dedication to counter- narcotics efforts) and continuing to use the certification process as a political weapon, the White House risks further disenchanting its remaining hemispheric allies in its fading war against drug traffickers.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, The National Bone Marrow Donor Registry, operated by the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP), is a precious national resource that we must continue to support. I was happy to join my colleagues, Chairman Bill Young and Chairman Mike Bilirakis, in introducing H.R. 3034, ``The National Bond Marrow Registry Reauthorization Act.'' In particular, I am extremely pleased that we are considering this bill in an expeditious manner to ensure that there is no gap in the continuation of this important program. I am also pleased that my colleagues, Mr. Ford of Tennessee and Mr. Lewis of Georgia have indicated their endorsement for this legislation. Since its inception, the NMDP has worked tirelessly to build a Registry that helps Americans in need. I applaud the donors who are true American heroes. They are willing to help individuals who they do not even know by taking the time to donate their marrow, blood, or cord blood. We can all hope to emulate their generosity and selflessness. We honor these men and women, of all races and ethnicities, by reauthorizing the Registry. Since 1986, there have been many scientific advances in the area of bone marrow transplants. The NMDP continues to work diligently to improve the odds of every American being able to find a match through the Registry. Its efforts have led to an increase of the number of minority donors who participate in the Registry, as well as the number of minorities who have access to these life-saving transplants. Today, I call on my colleagues to continue their support of the NMDP and its important mission. We should approve H.R. 3034 today so that we can ensure a timely reauthorization of the Bone Marrow Registry.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the wonderful union of two families. On Saturday, September 20, 2003, Enrique Torrez, Jr. and Angie Patruno were married at All Saints Church in Brooklyn, New York. Enrique, who is from the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn, and Angie, who is from the Ozone Park neighborhood of Queens, first met in junior high school and have been dating ever since. The groom's parents, Aura Ordonez and Enrique Torrez Sr., and the bride's parents, Reverend Molly Golden and Dominic Patruno, have given their full blessing to this joyous event. Angie has been very active in a wide range of civic issues in her community for about ten years. She currently works for the New York City Department of Education. Enrique is also a public servant, working for the New York State Department of Corrections. Mr. Speaker, for more than a decade, this couple has already shown a deep commitment to each other, which I am confident will last a lifetime. As such, they are worthy of receiving our recognition today.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, on July 14, Guatemalan Constitutional Court justices made history by declaring null and void two previous court rulings banning infamous former dictator Efrain Rios Montt from seeking presidential office. Efrain Rios Montt, the retired brigadier general and current head of Guatemala's national legislature, has been universally condemned for waging a ``scorched earth'' campaign against indigenous Mayan civilians during his 1982-1983 presidency. Some of the worst abuses in Guatemala's brutal 36-year civil war occurred during Rios Montt's rule. Wisely enough, the drafters of Article 186 of Guatemala's 1985 Constitution engrossed a ban to prevent leaders responsible for staging military coups from ever again seeking the Guatemalan presidency. Yet Rios Montt, who came to power through just such a coup in March of 1982, recently obtained a favorable ruling from Guatemala's highest court despite this earlier provision. He managed this by using his influence to pack the court with additional members who were personally loyal to him. In addition, he sought to legitimate his candidacy by claiming that the 1985 Constitution cannot be applied retroactively to actions taken three years before it was enacted. The State Department repeatedly has stated that Rios Montt's continued involvement in Guatemalan politics is an obstacle to effective U.S. relations with that country. In fact, events would seem to indicate that Rios Montt's candidacy is an equal threat to domestic stability within Guatemala; a number of weeks ago, mass protest in support of the ex-dictator's candidacy, clearly manipulated by Rios Montt and other leaders of his party, turned violent as mobs rushed into government buildings and seized them, including the Supreme Court. Since the Bush administration is so concerned with human rights in Iraq, what about Guatemala? Regional alliances such as the proposed U.S.-Central American Free Trade Agreement are bound to be jeopardized by Rios Montt's self-serving insistence on seeking the presidency, even at the country's democratic prospects. We as a body must strive to understand the potential implications and the high costs of Rios Montt's continued involvement in Guatemalan politics if we are to accelerate our steps towards the goal of promoting effective relations with the Central American region. On September 15, the United States recertified Guatemala, reversing a decision made in January due to the country's consistently poor efforts to stem the northward flow of narcotics that end up in our streets. Circumstances, however, suggest that the recertification was motivated not so much by any improvement in Guatemala's drug interdiction efforts, but by the Bush administration's ceaseless search for the expansion of free trade, even if it costs the U.S. hundreds of thousands of solid jobs. The Bush administration, eager to enact its Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) proposal, seems to have been responding to certain pressures to renew Guatemala's certification whatever its justification; twenty-one of our esteemed colleagues took the principled step of writing to the White House and saying that they would not vote for CAFTA without such recertification, and Guatemala, home to Central America's largest population and most formidable economy, would not likely approve the trade agreement if it remained decertified. This leads one to wonder, then, what the certification process and the war on drugs are really about, as the controversial and inequitable specter of free trade has clearly taken precedent. The following very timely memoranda on Guatemala's many problems were authored by Molly Maas and Jessica Leight, research associates at the highly respected Washington-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), a non-partisan organization that has long been committed to addressing issues associated with human rights, democracy and economic justice throughout the Western Hemisphere. COHA has been referred to by Senator Edward Kennedy in the Congressional Record as ``one of our Nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policymakers.'' Rios Montt Declared Eligible To Run in Guatemala's Upcoming Election (Jessica Leight and Molly Maas) On Tuesday, July 14, one of the most brutal dictators in modern Guatemalan history, General Efrain Rios Montt, was declared a legitimate candidate for the November presidential elections by the country's highest court. Since Guatemala gained its independence from Spain in 1821, this largely poor Central American nation has suffered under a series of foreign rulers and pathological homegrown despots. Yet, arguably, none of its leaders have been more infamous than Rios Montt, who seized power in a 1982 coup and presided over an unremittingly harsh dictatorship for eighteen months until a counter-coup installed General Oscar Humberto Mejia Victores as the country's military leader. Today, Guatemala's official Commission for Historical Clarification labels atrocities committed under Montt's regime as ``genocide,'' and impartial observers argue that the ex-dictator was responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses in the country's 36-year civil war, including tortures, massacres, the destruction of hundreds of indigenous communities, and illegal detentions and murders of human rights advocates and indigenous leaders. rios montt's quest for the presidency Since his fall from power in 1983, Rios Montt has twice attempted to run for the Guatemalan presidency, in 1990 and in 1995. Each time, he has been blocked by the country's courts on the grounds that Article 186 of the 1985 Constitution forbids the candidacy of all former coup leaders, a provision that was expressly designed to deter a presidential bid from Rios Montt. Despite these previous dismissals, however, the ruling FRG party, which controls the legislature as well as the presidency, once again nominated Rios Montt as its presidential candidate this past May, and the Constitutional Court--the nation's highest judicial authority--approved his candidacy on July 14. The decision in this case was blatantly biased, as the current court was especially expanded, i.e., ``packed'' with Rios Montt supporters. The president of the Constitutional Court, Mario Guillermo Ruiz Wong, is the former interior minister of the current FRG administration of President Alfonso Portillo, while another justice served as Rios Montt's personal lawyer. Three of the four judges who voted in favor of the ex- dictator have links to Portillo's administration. Following this ruling, a lower court, the Supreme Court of Justice, issued a contradictory injunction that temporarily suspended Rios Montt's candidacy. In response, protests rocked the capital on Thursday, July 24, with thousands of former beneficiaries of Montt's dictatorship joining more recent recruits to his rightwing cause in the streets of Guatemala City. Though FRG leaders and Rios Montt himself vehemently denied any role in organizing or even encouraging the demonstrations, the protest was marked by a suspicious lack of spontaneity. Pro-FRG peasants were trucked in from across the country by organizers wearing such masks to conceal their identity, and the entire operation had the mark of a well-planned and well-orchestrated demonstration of political intimidation. Most damning for the FRG and the Portillo administration was the lack of effort on the part of the police to control violence by the protesters, as well as the army's refusal to intervene even after President Portillo announced on radio and television on Thursday afternoon that he had ordered the armed forces out ``to guarantee respect of private property and the physical security of persons, as well as the defense of human rights.'' Though the demonstrators dispersed after receiving instructions to do so from Rios Montt on Friday morning, the capital continues to wait in fear for a return of the usually armed encapuchados. Perhaps even more alarmingly, the government's commitment to the preservation of basic public order, as well as its control over the armed forces--largely unreformed following decades of unrestricted and brutal war against the guerrillas--remain in grave doubt. Having only so recently emerged from forty years of two devastating civil war which cost upwards of 200,000 lives, Guatemala seems on the point of lurching back into its old habits of blood and gore, in a new era of mob rule. u.s. chilly on subject of rios montt The U.S., along with the United Nations, has been notably critical of the human rights abuses that continue to plague Guatemala's fragile democracy. The State Department condemned the riots and the lack of effort by the authorities to control the violence. Earlier, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher had indicated his disapproval of Rios Montt's candidacy, asserting that should Rios Montt be elected, ``realistically, in light of Mr. Rios Montt's background, it would be difficult to have the kind of relationship that we would prefer.'' This followed statements earlier in the year by U.S. Ambassador to Guatemala John Hamilton that noted a troubling lack of compliance on the part of the government with the 1996 UN-brokered peace accord. In an admirable display of candor about the deteriorating situation in Guatemala, Hamilton stated that, ``My government shares the Guatemalan people's concern that today, more than six years after the end of the armed conflict, there are still serious violations of human rights.'' It is crucially important that the U.S. maintain this strong stance in opposition to the candidacy of such a brutal ex-dictator and avoid the temptation to paper over the crimes of Rios Montt in order to ensure Guatemala's inclusion in the upcoming Central American Free Trade Agreement negotiations, scheduled to be completed by the end of this year. Last January, the Bush administration announced its decision to decertify Guatemala for insufficient progress in the war on drugs. Subsequently, it made use of a ``vital national interest waiver'' to continue to provide economic aid to the country in spite of the decertification. While continuance of such assistance provides some valuable leverage for the U.S. to exercise, as it seeks to pressure the Guatemalan government to bring human rights violators to justice, rein in corruption and ensure an orderly democratic transition after the November elections, this is the case only if the White House indicates that it is prepared to advance the country's democratization. If the White House wishes to demonstrate that its concern for human rights extends beyond Iraq, then there can be no more appropriate task than to facilitate the unhindered operation of justice in Guatemala, a country that has seen precious little of it up to now.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor of Dr. Howard A. Riina, in recognition of his outstanding accomplishments in the field of medicine. Dr. Riina was born in Brooklyn, New York. From 1982 to 1987, he earned two undergraduate degrees. He received a Bachelor of Science and Engineering in Bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania and a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Biology from Franklin and Marshall College. After earning his medical degree from Temple University, Dr. Riina earned a Master of Philosophy degree in Molecular Neurobiology from the University of Cambridge. Since 2001, he has served as an Assistant Professor of Neurological Surgery in Radiology and in Neurology at Weil Medical College of Cornell University. Additionally, he is an Assistant Attending Neurological Surgeon at New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Chairman of Neurological Surgery at the Brooklyn Hospital Center, and NYP Hospital Consultant to HSS Orthopedic Surgery/Neurosurgery. Dr. Riina is also a member of several professional committees and associations as well including, the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, North American Skull Base Society, the Ethics Committee of the Weil Cornell Medical College and New York-Presbyterian Hospital, and the Weil Cornell Physician Organization Professional Liability Premium Subcommittee. He is also an Associate Fellow for the American College of Surgeons, and on the Executive Committee Joint Section of Cerebrovascular Diseases, AANS/ CNS. In addition to his hospital affiliations with New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Hospital for Special Surgery, the Brooklyn Medical Center, and St. Barnabas Hospital in Bronx, NY, Dr. Riina has also found the time to contribute numerous scholarly articles and books in the field of neurology. He has also been awarded the Bayer Corporation Educational Grant. However, arguably, his most important accomplishment was saving the life of Peggy Haskins, a constituent of mine. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Howard A. Riina has reached the highest levels of medicine and he has used his expertise to improve and save the lives of those in his community. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition today, and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring this truly remarkable person.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in memory of Rodney C. Gillis, in recognition of his dedication, his heroism, and his ultimate sacrifice for his city and Nation. Rodney was a man of purpose, integrity, intelligence, and compassion in both his professional and personal life. He was born on September 26, 1967 at St. Mary's Hospital in Brooklyn, New York and along with his beloved family, he grew up in the Crown Heights, Williamsburg, and Brownsville sections of Brooklyn. Rodney had a distinguished academic career, graduating from the Park West High School in Manhattan and later, earning a Sports Management Certificate from St. John's University. Afterward, he studied at the Island Drafting and Technical College and received a diploma for studies in mechanical and electrical drafting and an Associate Degree in Computer Aided Drafting and Design. He also graduated with a diploma in Law, Police Science and Social Science from the New York City Police Department Police Academy. In 1983, he began his professional career working as a manager at the Cooper Lantern Restaurant and then at Gibbs and Cox Naval Architects and Marine Engineers Inc., as a C.A.D.D. Supervisor. Later, Rodney joined the New York City Police Department and was assigned to the 71st precinct. He later served as a Patrol Officer in the 79th precinct and in the Emergency Service Squad 8. Additionally, he served at the 77th precinct as the FTU Supervisor. He eventually returned to Emergency Service as a Sergeant, initially in squad 4, and finally in squad 8. His life long dream became a reality the day he got assigned to the New York City Emergency Service Unit. He quickly excelled, becoming proficient in every aspect of his new job. From taking down a jumper from the Brooklyn Bridge to extricating a victim from a vehicle, Sergeant Gillis always exuded passion and dedication in his job. He was certified as an Emergency Medical Technician, Hazardous Materials Technician, Emergency Psychological Technician, P.A.D.I. Certified Diver, Rescue Level I Repelling, Jaws of Life Rescue System Operator, and a New York City Special Weapons and Tactics Member and Supervisor. He was also a member of the Guardians Association, the Police Benevolent Association, the Honor Legion of the Police Department of the City of New York, and the Fraternal Order of Police and Sergeants Benevolent Association. Rodney's hard work earned him numerous medals and honors including the Excellent Police Duty award seven times, a Meritorious Police Duty award twice, and a Commendation. He was also awarded, posthumously, the prestigious Medal of Honor. Mr. Speaker, Sergeant Rodney C. Gillis served his city in exemplary fashion as a member of the New York City Police Department, and on September 11, 2001, he gave the ultimate sacrifice to New York and the Nation. As such, he is more than worthy of receiving our recognition today and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring this truly remarkable person.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have co-sponsored with the gentleman from Indiana a recent letter to the State Department asking them to withdraw the offensive video ``Terrorism: A War Without Borders,'' which characterized all Sikhs as terrorists. This is offensive and against America's principles. As a minority, I take special offense at this kind of characterization of any minority group. While the video may have had some usefulness in reminding Americans what they can do to help combat the threat of terrorism, its stereotyping of Sikhs as terrorists is unacceptable. Let me quote from the letter, Mr. Speaker: ``This video should be corrected or withdrawn immediately. The United States government should not be in the business of spreading inaccurate information, especially when that information is offensive to a hard-working, honorable people and serves only to promote the interests of a foreign regime.'' The Sikhs are hard-working people who have been involved in every aspect of American life. One Sikh American, Dalip Singh Saund, even served in the U.S. Congress. Back in the subcontinent, they are one of many national groups, along with predominantly Christian Nagas, Kashmiris, and others struggling for their sovereignty and independence from India, which is run by militant Hindu nationalists bent on imposing Hinduism on all aspects of Indian life. The Sikh leadership has committed to carrying out this struggle by peaceful, democratic, nonviolent means. Yet it is for seeking their freedom at all that India labels them ``terrorists.'' In fact, shortly after India's independence Prime Minister Nehru issued a directive calling Sikhs a ``criminal class'' and ordering police to keep special track of them, despite the fact that the Sikhs, who were less than two percent of the population, gave the majority of the sacrifices in India's freedom struggle. I am very distressed to see the government of the United States repeating this offensive description. That is why withdrawing this video is so important, Mr. Speaker. There were more than 300 cases of hate crimes or actions against Sikhs in the wake of September 11, 2001. For the United States to give support in an official production of the government to the characterization of all Sikhs as terrorists merely encourages more of this kind of hate against loyal, hard-working, honest Americans. It also unfairly supports the position of a repressive regime that has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since the Golden Temple attack of June 1984, according to figures compiled by the Punjab State Magistracy and human rights groups, as well as over 200,000 Christians in Nagaland since 1947, over 85,000 Kashmiri Muslims since 1988, and tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils, and others. It encourages a government that admits to holding 52,268 Sikh political prisoners and holds tens of thousands of other minorities as political prisoners as well, according to Amnesty International. Mr. Speaker, we should not be endorsing the party line of such a repressive regime. Instead, we should be working to support freedom by stopping U.S. aid to India until all people there enjoy full and equal human rights and by supporting self-determination for the Sikhs of Khalistan, the Kashmiris, the Nagas, and everyone seeking freedom. That is the democratic way and it is the only way to bring real peace and freedom from terrorism to everyone in South Asia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place the letter from Members of Congress to Secretary Powell into the Record at this time for the information of my colleagues. Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, September 18, 2003. Hon. Colin Powell, Secretary of State, Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Powell: As Members of the United States Congress, we are very concerned about your Department's video, ``War Without Borders.'' Your depiction of the Sikhs is discriminatory, unfair, and offensive. The video is offensive to Sikhs around the world and to all people who support nondiscrimination and freedom. The video inaccurately broadly labels all of the world's 25 million Sikhs--500,000 of whom live in the United States--as terrorists. This is offensive and inaccurate. The video's description of the June 1984 Indian military attack on the Golden Temple in Amritsar, the most sacred of Sikh shrines, misrepresents the circumstances of that unfortunate incident. Every terrorist act cited in the video is described as either the work of an individual or a group of a certain nationality or a group, such as Al Qaeda or the like, which honorably refrains from labelling an entire people as terrorists. Yet with the Sikhs it takes a different approach, referring to the terrorists merely as ``Sikhs,'' thus implicitly creating the impression that all Sikhs are terrorists. But there were no terrorists in the Golden Temple complex. The book Chakravyuh: Web of Indian Secularism reprints letters showing conclusively that India planned this attack in order to kill Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and other Sikh leaders who spoke out for a sovereign Sikh state. Labelling all Sikhs who support an independent, sovereign Khalistan as terrorists is the propaganda line of the repressive Indian regime. We share your desire to have good relations with India, but good relations must not trump truth. India is a repressive government. Over 250,000 Sikhs have been murdered by the Indian government since the Golden Temple attack, according to figures compiled by the Punjab State Magistracy and human rights groups and reported in The Politics of Genocide by lnderjit Singh Jaijee. According to a report by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR), the Indian government admits to holding 52,268 political prisoners under the brutal, repressive ``Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act'' (TADA), which expired in 1995. In addition, India has murdered over 200,000 Christians in Nagaland since 1947, over 85,000 Kashmiri Muslims since 1988, and tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils, and others. An Indian Cabinet minister said that everyone who lives in India must either be a Hindu or be subservient to Hinduism. This video should be corrected or withdrawn immediately. The United States government should not be in the business of spreading inaccurate information, especially when that information is offensive to a hard-working, honorable people and serves only to promote the interests of a foreign regime. Sincerely, Dan Burton. Ed Towns. Wally Herger.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, as the United Nations General Assembly convenes for its 58th session this week, I remind my colleagues that the Republic of China on Taiwan--a free and open democratic society and a leading trade partner of the U.S.--is still being denied membership to that world body. It is time for the U.N. to readmit Taiwan. Taiwan not only has a thriving democracy and prosperous economy, but its 23 million people make it larger than three quarters of the existing member states of the U.N. It is hard to conceive of any good reason to continue denying such a worthy country admission to this vitally important world body. There exists now, and has existed before, examples of parallel representation of the countries in the U.N. I speak now of East and West Germany which both held memberships in the U.N. until their reunification in 1990. Today both the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea are members of the United Nations. Taiwan is not only a free and open democracy, a bulwark for human rights and an important player in our global economy, but it is a good neighbor to countries in need around the world. Time and time again, Taiwan has heeded calls by the U.N. and others for emergency assistance to countries suddenly fallen victims to natural disasters or war. Among others, it has assisted Afghanistan, Kosovo, Turkey, Nicaragua, El Salvador, the fight against aids in Africa, and the current relief needs of Iraq. The 23 million people of this country--who have demonstrated in nearly every way imaginable that they are responsible citizens of the world--deserve a voice at the U.N.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, recently the State Department put out a video called ``Terrorism: A War Without Borders'' that is offensive. The video portrays all Sikhs as terrorists. This characterization is inaccurate. It is also offensive to any fair-minded person. How can the State Department portray an entire group as terrorists? Secretary Powell should order the immediate withdrawal of this offensive video. This kind of stereotyping is simply unacceptable. There are more than half a million Sikhs in the United States. Are they all terrorists, Mr. Speaker? They are active in all phases of American life, from law to medicine to agriculture to information technology. These are people who contribute a lot to America's way of life. Many of them were attacked after September 11, yet they still believe in America. To label all Sikhs terrorists demeans the Sikh people, their faith, and their national aspirations and culture. This is extremely unfair. Yet the video consistently labels Sikhs as ``terrorists'' while ignoring the brutal atrocities carried out against minorities by the Indian government. For example, the video's description of the attack on the Golden Temple in June 1984 simply refers to ``Sikhs,'' thus condemning all Sikhs as members of a terrorist organization. What the video ignores is that Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, General Shabeg Singh, and many other Sikh leaders took refuge in the Golden Temple to protect themselves from the atrocities that the Indian government was already carrying out. They had been threatened with violence for peacefully speaking out on behalf of the rights of their people. Over 20,000 Sikhs were killed over that three-day period in June 1984 as the Indian government attacked the Golden Temple and 38 other Sikh Gurdwaras throughout Punjab to frighten the Sikhs and end their movement to free themselves. Instead, just as Bhindranwale predicted, they laid the foundations for an independent Sikh state called Khalistan, which finally declared its independence from India on October 7, 1987. Let me be among the first to congratulate the Sikhs on the upcoming anniversary of that event. Mr. Speaker, we all seek good relations with India. But it is offensive and inappropriate to suppress atrocities and spread inaccurate propaganda to achieve this objective. Why is our government placing the derogatory label of terrorist on an entire people? This is not something the government of the United States, which was founded on tolerance, should be doing. The State Department should immediately remove this from circulation immediately so that it can either be corrected or withdrawn. Fairness demands that we stop labelling entire peoples with derogatory characterizations like ``terrorist.'' Our government should stop American aid and trade with India until the Sikhs, the Nagas, the Kashmins and all the people of South Asia enjoy full freedom and democratic rights and we should strongly and actively support these peoples in their effort to have self-determination in free and independent states. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert the recent letter from International Sikh Organization to Secretary of State Powell about this video into the Record. Guru Gobind Singh Ji, Tenth Master Washington, DC, July 29, 2003. Hon. Colin Powell Secretary of State, Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Powell: On behalf of the 25 million strong Sikh Nation and over 500,000 Sikhs in the United States, I am writing to express the outrage of the Sikh community at the new video ``Terrorism: A War Without Borders.'' While Sikhs fully support the war against terrorism, your video inaccurately depicts Sikhs as terrorists. The video is offensive to Sikhs around the world. It significantly misrepresents the Sikh faith and the Sikh culture. The video inaccurately uses the term ``Sikh terrorist'' to broadly label all of the world's 25 million Sikhs--500,000 of whom live in the United States--and condemns all people of the Sikh faith. This is offensive and inaccurate. The video's description of the June 1984 Indian military attack on the Golden Temple in Amritsar, the most sacred of Sikh shrines, is completely bogus and entirely false. Every terrorist act cited in the video is described as either the work of an individual or a group of a certain nationality or a group with its own identity. But in the 1984 Attack on Darbar Sahib, the video refers to the terrorists as ``Sikhs''. It shows Sikhs, easily recognizable from their turbans and beards, with weapons in the Darbar Sahib complex along with some Indian soldiers. The fact is that there were no ``terrorists'' in Darbar Sahib. Sikh leaders, including Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and others, took refuge there to protect themselves from Indian government violence against Sikhs. Letters reprinted in the book Chakravyuh: Web of Indian Secularism show conclusively that India pre-planned this attack in order to kill Bhindranwale and other Sikh leaders who spoke out peacefully for Sikh sovereignty. After the attack, Indira Gandhi said, ``I have broken the back of the Sikh Nation by attacking the Golden Temple.'' If the sanctity of the Golden Temple cannot be protected, how can the Sikh Nation survive? Labelling all Sikhs who support an independent, sovereign Khalistan as terrorists is the propaganda line of the repressive Indian regime. I would expect better from the State Department, especially under your outstanding leadership, than to spout the cliches of Indian disinformation. The segment on the Darbar Sahib attack states: ``In an effort to establish an independent state, Sikh terrorists seized Darbar Sahib Shrine in Amritsar, India. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi ordered a military campaign to drive out the terrorists. Hundreds were killed.'' In fact, over 20,000 were murdered in the attack on Darbar Sahib and 38 other Sikh Gurdwaras throughout Punjab, which was known as Operation Bluestar. The aim of this operation was to wipe out the Sikh religion. In actuality, it is the Indian government that is the terrorist organization. The Washington Times reported on January 2, 2002 that the Indian government is sponsoring cross-border terrorism in the Pakistani province of Sindh. India stationed troops on the border in Kashmir while Pakistani troops were helping American forces look for Al Qaeda operatives, forcing Pakistan to divert troops to that border and reducing the effectiveness of their help in the search for Al Qaeda. This was a de facto pro-terrorist action. It has provided heavy water to Iran and has done business with Iraq for many years. The Indian oil minister declared Iraq ``a strategic partner.'' In November 1994, the Indian newspaper Hitavada reported that India paid the late Governor of Punjab, Surendra Nath, about $1.5 billion to organize and support covert terrorist activities in Punjab and Kashmir. Two independent reports and an article in the New York Times magazine all showed that Indian forces were responsible for the massacre of 35 Sikhs in Chithisinghpora in March 2000 during President Clinton's visit. Indian forces were caught red-handed trying to set fire to a Gurdwara and some Sikh homes in a village in Kashmir. The book Soft Target conclusively shows that India blew up its own airliner, killing 329 innocent people, to blame the Sikhs. Why is the State Department trying to appease such a state? In all, over 250,000 Sikhs have been murdered by the Indian government since the Golden Temple attack, according to figures compiled by the Punjab State Magistracy and human rights groups and reported in The Politics of Genocide by Inderjit Singh Jaijee. According to a report by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR), the Indian government admits to holding 52,268 political prisoners under the brutal, repressive ``Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act'' (TADA), which expired in 1995. Another 50,000 have been arrested, tortured, killed in custody, declared ``unidentified,'' and secretly cremated. The man who exposed this secret cremation policy, Jaswant Singh Khalra, was kidnapped by the police and murdered while in police custody. His body was never handed over to his family. India has murdered over 200,000 Christians in Nagaland since 1947, over 85,000 Kashmiri Muslims since 1988, and tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils, and others. An Indian Cabinet minister said that everyone who lives in India must either be a Hindu or be subservient to Hinduism. Since Christmas 1998, priests have been murdered, nuns have been raped, churches have been burned, Christian schools have been attacked. Missionary Graham Staines and his two sons, ages 8 and 10, were burned to death while sleeping in their jeep. Their killers chanted ``Victory to Hannuman,'' a Hindu god. None of these people has been brought to justice. Missionary Joseph Cooper was deported back to Pennsylvania after Hindus attacked him so severely that he had to spend a week in the hospital. No action has been taken in these cases. Police broke up a Christian religious festival by opening fire on it. All over India, laws are being passed that ban conversion to any religion except Hinduism. Newspaper reports show that the Indian government pre- planned the attack on Muslims in Gujarat last year in which 2,000 to 5,000 Muslims were killed, according to the Indian newspaper The Hindu. Police were ordered to stand aside and let the massacre happen, in a striking parallel to the 1984 Delhi massacre of Sikhs in which police were locked in their barracks while state-run television and radio called for more Sikh blood. Secretary Powell, the State Department owes the Sikh Nation an apology. On behalf of the Sikh community in America and worldwide, I request an apology and correction from you for this offensive and inaccurate video. The video should be corrected or withdrawn. I thought that the United States of America was dedicated to the truth, not to spreading the disinformation of a terrorist regime. I would like to meet with you about this at your earliest convenience. Please contact me at the above number to let me know when we can meet. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President, International Sikh Organization.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, while we were in recess, India celebrated its Independence Day on August 15. I join my colleagues in congratulating India on 56 years of independence, but what is India really celebrating? Indian Independence Day is certainly not a celebration for the minorities living under the boot of Indian repression. Is missionary Graham Staines, who was burned to death along with his two young sons while they slept in their jeep, celebrating? Is human-rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra, who was murdered in police custody after exposing the Indian government's policy of mass cremations, celebrating? Is Gurdev Singh Kaunke, who was murdered by the Indian police official Swaran Singh Ghotna, celebrating? What about the priests who have been murdered, the nuns who have been raped, the Christians whose peaceful religious festival was broken up by police gunfire, or American missionary Joseph Cooper, who was thrown out of the country after being beaten so severely by Hindu nationalists that he had to spend a week in a hospital? Do you think they are celebrating Indian Independence Day? I seriously doubt it, Mr. Speaker. India is a multinational state like the old Austro-Hungarian Empire or the Soviet Union. The record of history is that countries like that don't last. Eventually, they all break up. That makes India's 56 years of independence all the more remarkable, and perhaps it explains why India has to try to keep the country together by force. This effort has claimed the lives of over a quarter of a million Sikhs, over 200,000 Christians in Nagaland, more than 85,000 Kashmiri Muslims as well as thousands of Muslims in Gujarat and other places around the country, and tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils, and so many others. According to the Movement Against State Repression, India admitted to holding more than 52,000 Sikhs as political prisoners under TADA, a repressive law that expired in 1995. Some of these Sikhs have been in custody for almost 20 years without charge or trial. Even a Sikh Member of Parliament has recently had TADA charges brought to court against him. Amnesty International notes that tens of thousands of Christians, Muslims, and others are also being held as political prisoners, Mr. Speaker. Do you think they are celebrating India's independence? Listen to what a spokesman for the Golden Temple, Narinder Singh, told National Public Radio on the fiftieth anniversary of Indian independence in 1997: ``The Indian government, all the time they boast that they are secular, that they are democratic. They have nothing to do with a secularism, nothing to do with a democracy. They kill Sikhs just to please the majority.'' And Sikhs are unfortunately not the only ones. That is why Sikhs from the East Coast showed up to protest in front of the Indian Ambassador's residence, where an Independence Day celebration was being held. They demanded the basic democratic freedom of self-determination and freedom for the Sikh homeland, Khalistan, which declared itself independent on October 7, 1987. Mr. Speaker, it is time for America to take a stand for freedom and democracy in South Asia. We must act now to cut off aid to India until it allows real democracy and freedom for the Sikhs, Christians, Dalits, Muslims, and other minorities. And we must put this Congress on record in full support of self determination for all the peoples and nations of South Asia in the form of a free and fair plebiscite on the question of independence. Self-determination is the cornerstone of democracy and India is not allowing self-determination for anyone but the upper-caste Brahmins. A free and fair plebiscite will allow everyone to have self- determination and allow this to happen peacefully. We must not allow militant Hindu fundamentalist theocrats to turn South Asia into another Yugoslavia, Mr. Speaker. I would like to place the International Sikh Organization's press release on the Independence Day protest into the Record at this time. Deceitful Indian Government Moves Independence Day Celebration To Avoid Sikh Demonstrators--Are Victims of Indian Repression Celebrating? Washington, D.C., August 15, 2003.--The cowardly, deceitful Indian regime again moved its Independence Day celebration from the Indian Embassy in Washington, D.C. to the Ambassador's residence to avoid Sikhs who came from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia to protest Indian repression of Sikhs, Christians, Muslims, and other minorities and to demand an independent, sovereign Khalistan. ``This action shows the cowardice of the fundamentalist Hindu nationalists,'' said Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of Khalistan. ``They are afraid of a peaceful protest,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``That is not how democracies act,'' Dr. Aulakh said. The protestors raised slogans like ``India out of Khalistan'', ``Khalistan Zindabad'', and others. They carried signs demanding the release of over 52,000 Sikh political prisoners in India as well as thousands of Christian, Muslim, and other political prisoners, denouncing India for its violent repression of minorities, pointing out India's long history of anti-Americanism. and demanding freedom for Khalistan. Khalistan is the independent Sikh homeland declared on October 7, 1987. It has been under Indian occupation since then. When India became independent, Sikhs were equal partners in the transfer of power and were to receive their own state, but the weak and ignorant Sikh leaders of the time were tricked into staying with India on the promise that they would have ``the glow of freedom'' and no law affecting the Sikhs would pass without their consent. Sikhs ruled an independent and sovereign Punjab from 1710 to 1716 and again from 1765 to 1849 and were recognized by most of the countries of the world at that time. No Sikh representative has ever signed the Indian constitution. The Council of Khalistan is the government pro tempore of Khalistan, the Sikh homeland. History shows that multinational states such as India are doomed to failure. Countries like Austria-Hungary, India's longtime friend the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and others prove this point. India is not one country; it is a polyglot like those countries, thrown together for the convenience of the British colonialists. It is doomed to break up as they did. ``We only hope that the breakup will be peaceful,'' said Dr. Aulakh, ``and that the fundamentalist Hindu nationalists will not force a violent, bloody breakup like that of Yugoslavia.'' India is ruled by Hindu theocrats whose agenda is ``Hindu, Hindi, Hindutva, Hindu Rashtra,'' or total Hindu domination of every facet of Indian life. An Indian Cabinet minister said that everyone who lives in India must be a Hindu or subservient to Hindus. ``It is clear that India does not accept Sikhs,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``The Indian government continues to persecute and kill our Sikh brethren,'' he said. ``Sardar Atinder Pal Singh's question of 13 years ago is still the question facing the Sikh Nation: Why don't we liberate Khalistan? As Professor Darshan Singh, a former Jathedar, said, `If a Sikh is not for Khalistan, he is not a Sikh','' Dr. Aulakh noted. An Indian newspaper reported on Tuesday that Sikhs in India had decided not to celebrate Indian Independence Day, but instead would hoist a black flag for the occasion. ``This shows that the drive for freedom is still alive in Punjab,'' Dr. Aulakh said. The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984, more than 200,000 Christians since 1948, over 85,000 Muslims in Kashmir since 1988, and tens of thousands of Tamils, Assamese, Manipuris, Dalits (the aboriginal people of the subcontinent), and others. The Indian Supreme Court called the Indian government's murders of Sikhs ``worse than a genocide.'' ``Is Jaswant Singh Khalra celebrating? Is Jathedar Kaunke celebrating? Is Graham Staines celebrating?,'' Dr. Aulakh asked. ``How can a democracy celebrate the kind of violent repression that claimed their lives?'' Indian police arrested human-rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra after he exposed their policy of mass cremation of Sikhs, in which over 50,000 Sikhs have been arrested, tortured, and murdered, then their bodies were declared unidentified and secretly cremated. He was murdered in police custody. His body was not given to his family. The police never released the body of former Jathedar of the Akal Takht Gurdev Singh Kaunke after SSP Swaran Singh Ghotna murdered him. No one has been brought to justice for the Khalra kidnapping and murder. SSP Swaran Ghotna has never been brought to trial for the Kaunke murder. Yet according to a report by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR), 52,268 Sikhs are being held as political prisoners in India without charge or trial. Some have been in illegal custody since 1984! Missionary Graham Staines was murdered along with his two sons, ages 8 and 10, by a mob of militant, fundamentalist Hindu nationalists who set fire to the jeep, surrounded it, and chanted ``Victory to Hannuman,'' a Hindu god. None of the people involved has been tried. The persons who have murdered priests, raped nuns, and burned Christian churches have not been charged or tried. The murderers of 2,000 to 5,000 Muslims in Gujarat last year have never been brought to trial. An Indian newspaper reported that the police were ordered to stand aside in that massacre and not to get involved, a frightening parallel to the Delhi massacre of Sikhs in 1984. ``Only in a free Khalistan will the Sikh Nation prosper and get justice,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``India should act like a democracy and allow a plebiscite on independence for Khalistan and all the nations of South Asia,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``We must free Khalistan now.''

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, there are approximately 2 million women with disabilities in the Medicare program. The Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research reported that these women are without appropriate access to primary care services. Their average time between gynecological visits was 10-12 years. They were also less likely than the general population to have received a recent mammogram. Certified Nurse- Midwives and Certified Midwives are qualified through their unique training to deliver the appropriate health services to this population. Research studies have shown that special populations seek out care from midwives and that their health outcomes are improved. The Medicare program reimburses Certified Nurse-Midwives at 65 percent of the physician fee schedule, resulting in an average payment of only $14 per annual exam. Midwives who serve these women are forced to subsidize care with their own money or turn away patients because they cannot afford to operate at a financial loss. Like physicians, skyrocketing professional liability premiums for midwives are leaving no monies to subsidize care. Congress has not provided an update in payment of midwifery services since 1988. The legislation that I have reintroduced today with my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Upton, increases the level of reimbursement to 95 percent of the physician fee schedule. This amount is based on studies using the relative value methodology. Additionally, Certified Nurse-Midwives serve as faculty members of medical schools. For over 20 years, they have supervised and trained residents. This legislation clarifies the fact that midwives who are medical school faculty members may bill for Medicare Part B services in accordance with CMS residency training regulations. The bill also includes technical corrections that will clarify the reassignment of billing rights for midwives who are employed by others and recognize that Certified Nurse-Midwives and Certified Midwives have hospital admitting privileges. I urge you to support this legislation, which is in the best interest of women with disabilities across this Nation.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart as New York City lost a true public servant yesterday in a violent shooting at City Hall. Councilman James Davis of Brooklyn was an intelligent, passionate, and energetic young man who had an extremely bright future. He worked very hard and took his duties as a public servant very, very seriously. With James, it was always about the community. He was dedicated to his community, having served as a police officer and district leader before being elected to the city council. One could always see the love he had for his community. I met James through the Youth March Against Violence that he organized. He was only 41 years old and had served almost one term in the New York City Council at the time of his murder. But he had already made his mark. I will miss him greatly, as will the entire city and Nation, especially those of us from Brooklyn. My sympathies and prayers go out to his family, to his staff, and friends. Farewell, James. You fought a good fight. Farewell, farewell.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, this is a bad bill. If we vote for this legislation tonight, we are kissing safety regulations good-bye and saying to patients, fend for yourselves in determining what drugs are safe. The FDA will have no oversight responsibility here. I will admit that I am not qualified to determine what drugs are safe. It takes expertise to distinguish between counterfeit medicines and the genuine article. We rely on our government's health and safety officials like the Food and Drug Administration to keep unsafe drugs out of American medicine cabinets. It is a mystery to me why anyone would vote for a bill that would prevent our health officials from doing their job. That just blows my mind. And it is a giant step in the wrong direction. I ask all of my colleagues here tonight to vote against this bill because safety is a nonpartisan issue. The life you save might be your own.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, for over half a century, Taiwan and the United States have been close Trade partners. Last year, bilateral trade between Taiwan and the United States reached US $51 billion, making Taiwan our 8th largest trading partner. It is interesting to note that bilateral trade between Taiwan and the United States surpassed that of all of our newest prospective free trade agreement partners combined. It is therefore timely for us to consider negotiating a free trade agreement with Taiwan. Our International Trade Commission recently issued a report which showed net gains totaling $3.4 billion for the U.S. economy from a proposed agreement. Beneficiaries would include U.S. exporters of cars, auto parts, machinery and equipment, chemicals and plastic products and certain foods. New opportunities would be created for financial and educational services. Negotiations of a trade agreement would serve long-term U.S. interests overseas. A trade agreement with Taiwan would phase out tariffs and other non-tariff barriers with Taiwan and promote U.S. efforts to increase trade not only with Taiwan but also with other countries in the Pacific Rim. We will build on the free trade agreements already concluded with Chile and Singapore. It is possible we will enter negotiations with Australia and New Zealand, eventually reaching the goal of a free trade zone in the region by 2010, as envisioned by the APEC Bogor Declaration. In short, Mr. Speaker, with Taiwan's recent accession to the World Trade Organization and passage of Trade Promotion Authority for the president, it is most appropriate for the United States to reach out to Taiwan, a strong friend and ally in the Pacific. We need to solidify our long-term trade relations with Taiwan by starting to negotiate a free trade agreement with Taiwan now.

Mr. TOWNS

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, last February, members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) met to discuss the prospect of creating a single Caribbean market economy. In mid-April, members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), a CARICOM subgroup, gathered to examine a similar proposal. Despite widespread enthusiasm among OECS members for economic integration, CARICOM participants Jamaica, Barbados, and other non-OECS members have expressed their reservations. In response to strains caused by declining tourist revenue and highly competitive pricing in the tropical fruit sector, some of the smaller Eastern Caribbean islands are recognizing that their interests and the interests of other CARICOM members do not always fully coincide. The disagreements between OECS members and the remainder of the CARICOM states merit adequate attention on Washington's part if the final product of FTAA negotiations is to result in maximum economic benefits for our own citizens and for our neighbors to the South, including, of course, the English-speaking Caribbean. As the economies of the region find themselves under increasing stress, and as diplomatic negotiations for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas marches onward, it seems clearer than ever that careful attention must be paid to the delicate economic relationships presently maintained by each of the hemispheric nations, both small and large. If the world's economy is to recover from its present downturn, and if future economic slumps are to be averted, planners must recognize that support for total economic integration is far from universal. They must strive to understand the reasons behind dissent, where it exists, and the reasons for support, where it thrives. It may very well be that principles of free trade can be implemented more effectively in some places rather than in others, where local economic fundamentals do not entirely coincide with those of the main players, like the U.S. The following research memorandum was authored by Justin Vance, a research associate with the Washington-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA), a nonpartisan, tax-exempt organization that has long been committed to addressing issues associated with human rights, democracy and economic justice throughout the western hemisphere. Fueled by a greater sense of urgency regarding the forging of a single market economy than some of their neighbors and fellow members in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the prime ministers of the Organization of the Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) met in mid-April 2003 to discuss the future of their economic relations. The seven permanent members of the OECS are Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Their governments have already passed EU-style measures that allow people to move freely across each other's borders. New passports for the Eastern Caribbean States are expected to be issued by 2004, while Antigua, St. Kitts, Montserrat, and St. Vincent have further accelerated their economic integration by also allowing the free movement of labor within the island group. The necessary planning to implement a single market economy would obviously take longer, but the group hopes to implement its integration by 2005. ``This is only advancing by two years what is really going to take place,'' said St. Vincent Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves, possibly alluding to the fact that CARICOM is aiming for its own single market economy by 2007, only two years after its original date. Most people tend to associate the Caribbean with stunning beaches and refreshing oceans. Some insist it is as close to paradise as one can find. Indeed, the Caribbean islands have plentiful resources and boast a soil structure that is perfect for growing a wide array of crops. Despite these riches, many Caribbean residents equate their alleged Eden more closely with Hades, as they struggle to feed their families. Some EC islands are among the most underprivileged in the world, with an increasing disparity between the rich and poor. Though the per capita GDP of most of the islands is increasing, they are still far behind that of the developed nations. The Caribbean islands have long faced an array of dilemmas. To cope with some of these, the Treaty of Chaguaramas, signed in Trinidad on the 4th of July 1973, established the Caribbean Community known as CARICOM. The organization has taken on evolving objectives including improving standards of living, safer working conditions, full employment, and enhanced levels of competitiveness and productivity. During the twenty-third meeting of the Conference of Heads of Government of the Caribbean Community in July 2002, Mr. Edwin W. Carrington, CARICOM's secretary-general, called upon those in attendance to celebrate the organization's 30th anniversary by implementing the Caribbean Single Market Economy (CSME). In what may be an understatement, Jamaican Prime Minister, Percival J. Patterson, observed, ``Our situation no longer permits time just for talking. It is high time for action here and now. In today's world there is no question of simply standing still. Just to mark the time is to be left behind.'' Some island governments argue that the creation of a single market economy that would allow goods, services, people and capital to move freely throughout the Caribbean would be a bonanza for their citizens. They insist that the CSME will increase production and trade among member countries while it also improves the quality of goods and the competitiveness of their prices, creates jobs and improves living standards. Others, such as The Bahamas, contend that such an agreement would infringe on their sovereignty. It may sometimes appear easier and seemingly more beneficial for an island nation to enter into a bilateral agreement with a single country rather than with a multiplicity of its neighbors and fellow CARICOM members. The Bahamas is content to be a part of CARICOM, but hesitant to integrate into a single market economy. According to Bahamian Prime Minister Hubert A. Ingraham, ``the `free movement of people' aspect of the SME would have serious social and political implications for The Bahamas, given its unique position as the target for massive unregulated migration from many countries.'' This realistic fear of a domestic job market that becomes inundated by floods of migrants from nearby islands appears justified when one looks at the statistics. The Bahamas currently enjoys a GDP per capita of $16,800, while the average for other CARICOM members is only $5,500. The unemployment rate in The Bahamas is a low 6.9% compared to the average rate of 16.6% in other CARICOM nations, (If Haiti is excluded, the average drops to 13%). CARICOM members believe that their economic problems will be ameliorated once they become a part of the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), making them even more competitive on the international level. Although Bahamian officials plan on negotiating in collaboration with CARICOM, they have confirmed that they are prepared to voice opinions that are at variance with the latter's initiatives in order to protect their interests as well as ensure the proper treatment of some of the other smaller, developing economies. Jamaica also on occasion has exhibited what could be called anti-CARICOM tendencies by negotiating a unilateral air services agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Washington. CARICOM members supposedly were working collectively towards a deal with the FAA, but Jamaica skirted what it saw as a slowmoving CARICOM out of fear of further jeopardizing its already hemorrhaging tourist industry. The Bahamas and Belize have also shown themselves to be willing to strike separate deals with the U.S. As tourism generates a large part of the foreign currencies for these nations, it was a matter of utmost importance to them to reach an agreement. In view of their individual interests, CARICOM's characteristic grindingly slow approach was producing paralysis. In response to the organization's long term aspirations to also form a political alliance as well, Prime Minister P.J. Patterson confirmed that Jamaica considers CARICOM a ``community of sovereign states'' and that his country would have no part of it, though they respect and support the rights of other CARICOM nations to negotiate accordingly, if they so desire. These types of divergences are what have kept CARICOM from implementing the single market economy about which they have been talking for the last fifteen years. Another deterrent to CARICOM's quest for economic unification is the fact that the Caribbean Islands all have fairly similar economies. Chicago School neoliberal economic scholars advocate strict adherence to the law of comparative advantage, specialization, and unfettered access to markets. They insist that if the above criteria are present, an economy will maximize production and benefit from the gains of trade. In the Caribbean, however, specialization has proven difficult due to the similarity of its economic profiles. Antigua, The Bahamas, Barbados, and Jamaica all depend heavily on tourism. For example, over 60% of the Bahamas' GDP comes from tourism. Over 50% of Belize's exports are from cane sugar, while St. Kitts also relies heavily on sugar, despite the commodity's falling price. St. Lucia and St. Vincent's primary income comes from the production of bananas, but competition involving this fruit is fierce as Central American countries are able to produce at a considerably cheaper price. Dominica also relies on bananas, but since Hurricane Luis in 1995 devastated the crop, the country has relied upon construction and such non-traditional commercial activities as soap production to fuel its recovery. Guyana has a large mining industry based on numerous gold deposits, but lacks the required skilled labor to fully exploit that commodity. Other resources found on the islands include bauxite, petroleum, and natural gas. This dependence on tourism and limited amounts of economic diversity among the islands has pressured CARICOM members and increased inter-island competition, as they at the same time seek out various bilateral agreements with other countries that best meet their needs. Perhaps for this reason, members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) have sought a single market economy sooner than CARICOM, hoping to do what the larger body has failed to accomplish thus far. Some observers claim the OECS is pushing to form a free trade agreement apart from CARICOM in an attempt to increase their collective bargaining power. Such an alliance would allow CARICOM's smaller member states to contract services collectively--including telecommunications services, which are currently over-priced due to their micro markets--as well as to import goods at lower prices through unified buying power. The island nations aspire to eventually be seen as a larger market and to profit from economies of scale that will also strengthen their voice in an already complex global economy, and, of course, in upcoming FTAA negotiations. Though not a single market economy, The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Mexico, the U.S., and Canada was met with considerable opposition when first proposed. It is the world's most extensive free trade agreement short of a common market. Since the beginning of its implementation in 1994, some tariffs have been completely eliminated while others will drop until they too disappear in five, ten, or fifteen years. From 1993 to 2001, bilateral trade between the U.S. and Mexico increased 188 percent. But despite these seemingly beneficial statistics, opponents still point out that hundreds of thousands of Mexicans have been negatively affected due to rising unemployment rates brought about by a contracting economy. In the first three years of NAFTA, over 2 million Mexicans lost their jobs. Many American and Canadian workers also lost out as companies moved south of the border in search of cheap labor. One convincing argument now being made is that those who benefit from NAFTA tend not to need it, while those who suffered before, continue to suffer, but even more dramatically. At the beginning of the year, U.S. officials announced the commencement of discussions concerning the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). The hope of negotiators is to eliminate tariffs and other economic barriers to the expansion of manufactured goods, agriculture, and services, as well as increasing FDI and portfolio investment between the United States and Central America. Over 50 programs will be initiated to help Central American countries compete on an international level. It remains to be seen, however, whether CAFTA will truly help stabilize the area's economies and bring relief to all strata of Central American societies. Some Caribbean authorities feel that a NAFTA-like prescription for the Caribbean would have a monumental effect on the area as the islands' individual economies are becoming more and more obsolete in the international market, based as they are on high cost sugar and banana cultivation as well as an increasingly fickle tourist industry. According to the CARIBNews, the OECS hopes to implement a single market economy by 2005 because ``the region is likely to be exposed to tough competition as it joins Latin American and North American countries in signing onto the Free Trade Area of the Americas.'' Dr. Richard Bernal, director-general of the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery (CRNM), has said that the Caribbean will inevitably have to increase its participation in the global economy. Its advocates say that each of the nations in the Caribbean region would benefit greatly from being a part of the FTAA, as their worldwide markets would almost certainly expand. But some of the smaller and lesser- developed countries' fate could be far more problematic. If the U.S. and other large economies are interested in what the smaller countries have to offer--such as Guyana's gold and bauxite--they will need to include provisions that help those countries develop instead of marginalizing their exports and forcing down their prices, which will only add to the poverty that already is widely found. The OECS members who are seeking a single market economy and integration within the FTAA will soon know whether their economic prospects under the pending trade pact will fulfill the abundance of sales talk they have heard over the past few years.