Robert Wexler

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, when I put my 8-year-old son to sleep on Tuesday night, he told me his whole body felt like crying. Today, the whole body of America is crying. As we internalize the depth of the pain and horror inflicted on our people, we cherish life, we cherish freedom, we cherish America. And that is why we must authorize military force to rid the world of the insidious scourge of terrorism, no matter what the cost, no matter how long it takes. I beg God to sustain us and permit us to be the worthy defenders of peace and freedom.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the resolution. No words can express the sorrow and outrage we all feel in the wake of yesterday's catastrophic events. The lives of countless Americans were forever shattered by the most barbaric act of terrorism ever committed against the United States. My prayers and profound sympathy go to the victims, family, and friends of those affected in yesterday's tragedy. In a very real way, all Americans and all people who believe in freedom were victims of these atrocities. There is absolutely no doubt that those guilty of this vicious and devastating attack will be hunted down and brought to justice. Any nations or individuals harboring or assisting them in any way will be considered equally guilty of these crimes. It is also certain that our nation will now embark on a relentless and unprecedented worldwide campaign to root out terrorism and those who sponsor its vicious and craven tactics. This national nightmare will irrevocably alter how we assess our nation's security; and though our national psyche is imprinted forever with these devastating symbols of hatred, the madmen who perpetrated this act made a terrible and irreversible mistake. Ultimately, this act of violence will not weaken America, it will strengthen our dedication to democracy and bolster our commitment to keeping all Americans safe and free. We will reaffirm our Nation's fundamental values, and we will be stronger than ever.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2278. This is a positive bill because it allows work authorization for nonimmigrant spouses of intracompany transferees. Not only will spouses be able to accompany their husband or wife who is in the United States in a nonimmigrant capacity, but these spouses will now be afforded the opportunity to be employed. It makes no sense to allow spouses to accompany their loved ones to the United States and then deny them the opportunity to be employed. Global companies are finding it increasingly difficult to relocate foreign nationals to the United States. This bill makes relocation easier since spouses will not have to forgo their career, ambitions or a second income, which is increasingly necessary. This bill is also positive since it contains a 6-month reduction in the period of time during which certain intracompany transferees have to be continuously employed before applying for admission to the United States. Without this bill, companies who recruit and hire individuals overseas with specialized skills to meet the needs of their clients will be able to bring these employees more expeditiously. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2277. While current law allows spouses to come to the United States with E visa holders, spouses are not allowed to work in the United States. H.R. 2277 would allow these spouses work authorization in the United States while accompanying the E visa holder. It does not make any sense whatsoever to allow spouses to accompany their partners to the United States and then deny them the opportunity to be employed. Furthermore, this bill makes the time these families live in the United States financially easier since it allows for a second income. Madam Speaker, I hope that this bill is the beginning of an understanding that we should allow spouses in other nonimmigrant classifications who accompany their husband or wife to the United States to be able to obtain work authorization. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to state for the record my enthusiastic support for the Dingell-Ganske Bi-Partisan Patients' Bill of Rights (H.R. 2563) and my opposition to the Norwood amendment. The Dingell-Ganske is the only true patient protection bill in Congress. H.R. 2563 allows patients to sue an HMO in state courts when they are denied care. Further, the bill allows patients to sue in federal court for breach of contract. H.R. 2563 would return medical decision-making to patients and health care professionals. Americans would have greater access to specialists, including pediatric specialists for children and gynecologists for women. Coverage for emergency room care would be available, as well as the right to talk freely with doctors and nurses about every medical option. The Patients' Bill of Rights would end financial incentives for doctors and nurses to limit the care they provide. It would also provide an appeals process and real legal accountability for the decisions made by insurance companies. Opponents of this bill claim that the Dingell-Ganske Patients' Bill of Rights would unnecessarily expose employers to lawsuits. In fact, the newly filed Dingell-Ganske bill includes amendments adopted in the Senate which shield employers from liability if they are not directly involved in the decisionmaking process. In light of the passage of the McCain, Kennedy, Edwards Bipartisan Patients' Bill of Rights in the Senate, the Republican leadership has drafted a weak amendment that purports to protect patients' rights while at the same time protecting the insurance industry. At the last minute, the President, the Republican leadership and Congressman Norwood crafted an amendment that basically negates the Dingell-Ganske bill. While the Norwood Amendment claims to allow lawsuits to be filed in state courts, such suits would be limited by federal law. Further, the Norwood amendment allows employers to unilaterally remove an action from state to federal courts. Federal courts are the wrong venue for bringing medical suits. Federal courts are backlogged with cases that would take priority over civil actions. Further, federal courts do not have experience with medical suits because they are typically brought before state courts. Additionally, the Norwood amendment unreasonably caps non-economic damages. Those without substantial income--the elderly, children and homemakers would suffer the most under these limited damage provisions. The Amendment also caps punitive damages and heightens the bar required to obtain compensation by asking juries to meet the ``clear and convincing'' standard prior to awarding damages. In short, the Amendment creates legal hurdles that make it almost impossible for a patient who is being denied care to get help from the courts. All concerns over the Bipartisan Patient Protection bill have been resolved in the Senate and have been adopted in the newly drafted Dingell-Ganske. There is no reason to oppose this bill, unless you are trying to appease the insurance companies.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Hastings amendment to the bill, and I commend my neighbor and colleague for bringing this issue to the Floor of the House. America is the freest and most prosperous nation on earth. We are the strongest and most resilient democracy on the planet. Yet last November, we failed our citizens in the most fundamental way. The right to vote cuts to the very bone of our democracy. When tens of thousands of Americans cast their ballots--only to have them thrown out--whether you like the results of the Presidential election or not-- it is undeniable that something is wrong in America. If we fail to learn from this tragic experience then shame on us. What happened in Palm Beach County, Florida on election day is personal to me. I saw it with my own eyes. I experienced it myself. I stood in front of voting precincts and witnessed a horrible state of confusion. I rise today representing the citizens of my district who went to vote on election day only to be confronted with a puzzle rather than a ballot. I watched the dismay and felt the anger of patriotic Americans, many of whom fought in World War II and Korea, and haven't missed an election in over 50 years, as their votes were rendered meaningless. I support the Hastings electoral reform amendment to give a voice to those Floridians whose votes were callously discarded due to a ballot that was so confusing intelligent men and women unknowingly cast two votes for President, or one vote for the wrong man. I support the Hastings electoral reform amendment because the collapse of the election system in Florida was not color-blind. The facts speak for themselves. Fifty-four percent of Florida's discarded ballots were cast by African-Americans, even though African-Americans only comprise eleven percent of Florida's voters. Think about that. African-American voters were ten times more likely than white voters to have their ballots rejected in Florida. This reality is indefensible and we must act now to repair our citizens' faith in the system. Have no doubt about it, this is not just a Florida problem. It stretches coast to coast. Many of the problems that confronted Florida on election day occurred in other states. In fact, more votes were thrown out in Illinois than in Florida. This is a federal problem that demands federal attention. What happened in Florida on election day highlighted for the entire world that in America, even for a Presidential election, we have no national standards for the design of ballots--we have no national standards for the counting of ballots--we have no national standards for voting machinery--we have no national standards to prevent thousands of Americans from being purged from voter roles--and we have no reliable way to count the overseas ballots of the men and women in the military. The good news is--this problem can be solved, but we must commit the necessary resources. I strongly support the amendment sponsored by Representative Hastings which makes a substantial down payment on our obligation to help state and local governments modernize their election equipment and renew the integrity of our democracy. Electoral reform must not be a partisan cause. It is our national obligation. Election 2000 was a wake-up call to all Americans that we must not take our democracy for granted. We must commit the money, the resources and the energy to fix our election process once and for all. To do anything less is unforgivable. I urge you to support the amendment.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Capps amendment, which would earmark $25 million for Project Impact, a FEMA program which helps communities establish pre-disaster hazard mitigation programs. Project Impact communities initiate mentoring relationships, private and public partnerships, public outreach, and disaster mitigation projects to reduce the damage from potentially devastating disasters. South Florida is a wonderful place to live, but as you know, we are highly susceptible to hurricanes. The City of Deerfield Beach, Florida, has been diligently working to better prepare its residents for the next big hurricane by establishing a $42 million multi-purpose public service facility, or Mitigation of Operation Center (MOC). The MOC would serve as a shelter in the event of a natural disaster, and would house the City's Department of Public Works, Emergency Operations Center, Fire & Rescue Center, a Broward County Emergency Communications facility, and satellite facilities for the Broward County Sheriff's Office and Florida Atlantic University. The MOC would also include a water treatment facility. FEMA designated the City of Deerfield Beach, Florida, as our country's first Project Impact Community. Since its designation as one of the seven pilot Project Impact communities in 1997, Deerfield Beach developed a strong Project Impact initiative with over 100 small and large partners, completed with risk assessment and mitigation strategy. In fact, on November 20, 2000, Deerfield Beach was again recognized by FEMA with a Model Community Award. The residents of Deerfield Beach demonstrated the importance they place on hazard mitigation when they passed an $8 million bond issue in November, 1999, to build the MOC, one of the country's first. Another $22 million has been committed toward this project over the last few years to upgrade the City's water filtration facilities. Moreover, FEMA awarded Deerfield Beach with a Hazard Mitigation grant in the amount of $400,000. An earmark of $25 million for Project Impact would greatly help the efforts of communities like Deerfield Beach to be pro-active toward emergency preparedness. I am proud of the city's leadership on this issue, and I am hopeful that this Congress will recognize the commitment of communities like Deerfield Beach by providing these important and necessary funds. I urge you to support the amendment.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Smith-Rothman amendment and in opposition to the Flake amendment. People of good will can have different opinions regarding the efficacy of easing restrictions, travel restrictions on Cuba. But certain facts are undeniable and are undebatable: First, Cuban citizens enjoy no rights of free speech; Second, there have been and there is no prospect of there being any democratic free elections in Cuba; Third, as has been already pointed out, Cuba holds hundreds of political prisoners who are only guilty of being people of conscience; And, fourth, Castro continues to disrespect in its entirety any basic level of human rights for his own people. Then, on the other hand, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) argues that, although that may be true, the way to change that is for more Americans to go to Cuba and allow more cash into Cuba. I only wish that were true. If it were true, it already would have occurred, because Europeans and South Americans and people all over the world have been travelling to Cuba for years.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Community Solutions Act of 2001. In a 1780 letter, Benjamin Franklin wrote, ``When religion is good, I conceive that it will support itself; and, when it cannot support itself, and G-d does not take care to support, so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of the civil power, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.'' Forty-three years later, James Madison wrote in a letter, ``Religion is essentially distinct from civil government and exempt from its cognizance . . . a connection between them is injurious to both.'' Franklin and Madison's observations are still poignant, and relevant to today's debate on President Bush's social services plan. I join with many Americans who have great concerns about the provisions of his plan which punch holes in the firewall between places of worship and the government. A number of religious organizations already run very valuable social service programs, and Americans appreciate the significant contributions that these religious groups make to the well being of our communities. However, this proposed faith-based legislation unnecessarily entwines church and state in a financial relationship under the mantra of improving social services. The Founding Fathers understood that both church and state play important roles in the lives of Americans, but neither may function appropriately under our Constitution if they are heavily intertwined. The separation of church and state actually protects each from the other. Many Americans express concern over the potential for a disproportionate level of influence of religious doctrine upon the making of public policy. However, places of worship should also be concerned about interference from government. It would be a travesty if a financial relationship between the two became so significant that religious decisions are affected by concerns over public funding. Let us be straight-forward about the crux of this debate: The question is not whether churches, synagogues or mosques should provide social services. Of course they should. The question is whether religious organizations should abide by federal civil rights laws if they take federal money. The answer again is of course they should. Proponents of the President's plan call for the removal of ``barriers'' which religious charities face when attempting to secure public funding for their social service programs. These so-called ``barriers'' are America's civil rights laws, and we must not compromise them. If a privately-funded place of worship directs its employees to follow its religious dictates, then it is within its rights to do so. However, if it uses public funds, then it should not be allowed to discriminate against anyone. While we should always look for better ways to provide social services, I do not believe that the separation between church and state need to be dismantled to do so. I ask that you vote against the bill.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place in the Congressional Record the following speech given by Ahmet Ertegun, Chief Executive Officer of Atlantic Records, on May 18, 2001, after receiving the Prestigious Federation of Turkish American Associations (FTAA) Cultural Lifetime Achievement award during the FTAA's Turkish Cultural Week. As co-founder of the House Caucus on U.S.-Turkish Relations and Turkish-Americans, I believe there is no individual more deserving of the FTAA Cultural Achievement Award than Ahmet Ertegun who is a leading voice in the Turkish-American community and an extraordinary humanitarian. It would be an understatement to say that Mr. Ertegun is the epitome of the American dream. As a successful businessman and self-starter, he co-founded one of the most successful international recording studios, Atlantic Records. Mr. Ertegun has also been deeply involved in many worthwhile philanthropic activities. Thousands of individuals in the United States and throughout the world have benefited from his commitment and involvement in charities and civic organizations. The Turkish-American community should be extremely proud to have Mr. Ertegun as a leading spokesman to promote Turkish culture and history in the United States. He, along with the Federation of Turkish American Associations, are the heart and soul of a dynamic Turkish-American community. Finally, I want to thank Mr. Ertegun and the FTAA for their commitment to strengthening the relationship between the United State and Turkey. Like Mr. Ertegun and the FTAA, I believe that the friendship and strategic partnership between America and Turkey are essential to both countries and will grow even more important throughout the 21st century. Again, I join the Federation of Turkish American Associations and the Turkish-American community in celebrating Mr. Ertegan's extraordinary achievements and congratulate him on receiving the FTAA Cultural Lifetime Achievement award. Thank you. Your excellencies, ladies and gentlemen: It is a great honor for me to be recognized by the Federation of Turkish American Associations. I deem it a great honor to have been introduced by my dear friend, Arif Mardin. Arif, as our musical director, has made the key monumental record hits that have been the highlights of Atlantic's history: ``Respect'' by Aretha Franklin, the Saturday Night Fever album by the Bee Gees, and ``Wind Beneath My Wings'' by Bette Midler just to name a few. I was recently invited to a white-tie gala banquet in Nashville to get a music citation. This was a period when I was using crutches to walk. As they called my name and I started to walk up to the podium to receive the award, this southern lady turned to me and said: ``You must be mahty proud. This is the first time we've given this award to a foreign cripple.'' But to be serious, it is wonderful to see such a large group of Turkish Americans. Each and every one of you is an important part of what has become the beginnings of a group which could have some political influence in the near future, both here in America and also in Turkey, through our family and friends. It is most important that we, as Turkish Americans, champion the causes of freedom and justice, both here and in Turkey. As you all must know, Turkey is now going through a terrible time because of economic mismanagement. We are all aware of the rumors and accusations in the Turkish press, of chaos and corruption, in both the public and the private sector. But what has been the savior of Turkey has been the selfless and honest dedication of so many of its citizens, and the ever-present vigil of the Turkish Army, to protect the legacy of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. They have been our saviors through the many difficulties since the formation of the Republic in 1923. With the coming of the current crisis and the devaluation of the Turkish lira, President Bulent Ecevit sent for a top economist from the World Bank, Mr. Kemal Dervis, to establish reforms and to encourage economic help from our friends in America and in Europe. He has been promised over 16 billion dollars, but with stringent conditions, which require drastic changes in the economic and political systems initiated by Ataturk at the beginning of the Republic. Ataturk's dream was to bring his country and its people into the modern world's mainstream, and shortly before he died, he left this important message and I quote: ``I am leaving no sermon, no dogma, nor am I leaving as my legacy any commandment that is frozen in time or cast in stone. Concepts of well-being for countries, for peoples, and for individuals are changing in time. In such a world, to argue for rules that never change would be to deny the reality found in scientific knowledge and rational judgement''. It is my fervent hope that all of you support Mr. Kemal Dervis' mission and support President Ecevit in this critical moment. It is an important moment in Turkish history which will disengage the economic system from the political, which will bring about transparency and accountability in government, and help Turkey reach its destiny as an important member of the modern democratic world. May the army and the Turkish people persevere in their pursuit of Ataturk's dream.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place in the Congressional Record the following letter I received from A. Machkevitch the President of the Jewish Congress of Kazakhstan in support of H.R. 1318, legislation that would authorize President Bush to extend normal trade relations treatment to the products of Kazakhstan. Jewish Congress of Kazakhstan, Kynaev sir., June 27, 2001. Hon. Robert Wexler, Member of Congress, Cannon HOB, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Wexler: The Jewish Congress of Kazakhstan welcomes the decision of a number of US Congress members, in particular Senator S. Brownback and Congressman J. Pitts on termination of Section IV of Trade Law of 1974 in relation to Kazakhstan and granting the country a permanent Regime of Normal Trade Relationship with the USA. Undoubtedly, at the time of this Section adoption the decision of American legislators was timely and justified. One can not deny the fact that the communist regime tried all ways to oppress and limit rights of the country's Jewry. Similar to the representatives of many other nationalities of the Soviet Union we could neither openly declare ourselves as ethnic group, nor visit our relatives abroad, as well as freely profess our religion. In this respect we are immensely grateful to the American people demonstrating concern and sympathy with our life at the time of hardships. The amendment introduced by the two prominent US Statesmen-- Jackson and Vanick--warmed our hearts. However, the environment has changed. The Union broke up. Having cast off the totalitarianism chains, Kazakhstan has built a new independent state where the great principles of political and economic freedom, parity of rights and opportunities are being practiced. Today Kazakhstan is a democratic nation with steadily developing economy and fair chances to become a stronghold of security and democracy in the Central Asian region. The young State of Kazakhstan emerged on the background of unique ethnic situation. Kazakhstan was the only former soviet republic in the region without Realizing that the majority, of peoples of Kazakhstan subjected to mass repression at the time of stalinisim and fascism have been deprived of possibility to develop their culture and language, the Government of Kazakhstan encourages creation of ethnic and cultural centers in all regions of the country. The Jewry is not an exclusion. The only Jewish school in the Central Asian region successfully functions in our country, construction of 10 new synagogues is underway in the largest cities of Kazakhstan. In general, 3000 religious organizations of 46 confessions function in Kazakhstan. None of the other countries in the region can demonstrate such achievements. In our sincere belief the Kazakhstan Government's aspiration to preserve and strengthen stability and interethnic concord both in the country and the whole region should be encouraged by the USA. We proceed from the fact that a country which liberated the minds of people would be to a larger extent successful in achieving prosperity than a society burdened with heavy heritage of the past, such as amendment of Jackson--Vanick. In this context the Jewish community of Kazakhstan calls upon you to exert your influence in freeing Kazakhstan from this rudiment of the past, which would undoubtedly strengthen relationship between our countries and testify to the fact that voices of tens of thousands of the Kazakhstan Jews have been once again heard by our American friends. Yours Sincerely, A. Machkevitch, President.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit this letter for the Record. March 22, 2001. Hon. George W. Bush, President, the United States of America, the White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. President: It is my understanding that you are meeting with Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen and other top Chinese officials at the White House today. I would respectfully suggest that during these meetings, it is imperative that you send a clear message to the government of China that the United States will continue to strengthen our nation's longstanding relationship and commitment to the safety and well-being of the people and government of Taiwan. As you know, deeply strained relations between China and Taiwan greatly threaten stability and U.S. interests in East Asia. The United States should support the continuation of cross-strait dialogue with the government of China which I believe will help reduce tensions in the region. I was heartened by the bold decision of Taiwan President Chen Shui- bian to open shipping, transportation, and communication links between two offshore islands, Quemoy and Matsu and mainland China. The Chinese government has signaled that it will support this decision by Taiwan. This confidence building measure is important to a successful cross-strait dialogue, because it signals that the Chinese government, albeit reluctantly, is willing to compromise. Unfortunately other recent statements released by the Chinese government are contrary to the message of peaceful dialogue and potential cooperation in the Taiwan Strait. For example, a white paper issued by China on October 16, 2000, titled ``China's National Defense 2000,'' stated that ``if Taiwan continues to Taiwan should not be bullied into accepting China's ``one country, two systems'' formulation. As you are aware, the 1979 U.S. Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) reads: ``It is the policy of the United States to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means of grave concern to the United States.'' As you discuss cross strait relations with Vice Premier Qian Qichen, I urge you to reject any formulation that presupposes the final results of any negotiations between Taipei and Beijing and is not in accordance with the will of the Taiwanese people. As you know, the United States has a long history of providing Taiwan with weapons and equipment to enhance its defensive capabilities. In a 1997 trip to Taiwan, according to news reports, you expressed a commitment to the U.S. sale of defensive arms to Taiwan. I hope you keep that commitment and urge you to bolster Taiwan's self-defense capabilities which have not kept up quantitatively or qualitatively with the growing military might of China. Taiwan urgently needs defensive equipment to counterbalance the threat of hundred of missiles deployed along the coast of China across the Taiwan Strait. The significant gap between China and Taiwan was acknowledged in a recent report to Congress by the U.S. Pacific Command, Department of Defense, which states ``The United States takes its obligation to assist Taiwan in maintaining a self-defense capability very seriously . . . not only because it is mandated by U.S. law in the Taiwan Relations Act but also because it is in our own national interest. As long as Taiwan has a capable defense, the environment will be more conducive to peaceful dialogue, and thus the whole region will be more stable.'' In the context of strengthening relations with Taiwan, I believe that the new Administration should advocate Taiwan's inclusion in international organizations, including the World Health Organization, World Trade Organization, and the International Monetary Fund. It is unconscionable that twenty-three million people living in Taiwan do not have access to the medical resources of the WHO. At a minimum, Taiwan should be allowed to participate in the activities of the WHO as an observer. Mr. President, during your campaign you spoke positively about our nation's strong relationship and commitment to Taiwan. It would be a mistake for the United States to engage China at the expense of our relationship with Taiwan. I believe that this important bi-lateral relationship should be strengthened as it has been over the past several decades with a common commitment to the ideals of freedom and democracy that we as Americans hold sacrosanct. I look forward to working with you to promote U.S. interests in Asia by further strengthening our relationship with a free, democratic, and prosperous Taiwan. Robert Wexler.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, on November 19th, the Government of India announced a one-month unilateral cease-fire in Kashmir. India's Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, ordered all Indian security forces to cease operations in Kashmir during the month of Ramadan, the Muslim period of fasting and prayer. An article in the New York Times on November 20th described India's action as ``a rare, hopeful step toward ending more than a decade of violence in Kashmir.'' Prime Minister Vajpayee stated, ``I hope that our gesture will be fully appreciated and all violence and infiltration across the Line of Control and the international border will cease and peace prevail.'' Regrettably, India's courageous step for peace was immediately rejected by the four major Muslim guerrilla groups that have been battling since 1989 to forcibly tear the state of Jammu and Kashmir away from India. Still, despite the snubs from the militant leaders, India is making good on its cease- fire offer. Since the beginning of Ramadan at sundown on Sunday, November 26, Indian security forces have been under orders to conduct no operations against the guerrilla groups, and to react with force only if they are attacked. Unfortunately, it didn't take long for an attack to come. According to an account in the November 28 edition of The Washington Post, militants used a land mine to blow up an Indian army truck, killing three soldiers. There was additional violence as guerrillas tried to infiltrate into India's territory, across the Line of Control from Pakistani-held areas. These border incursions are clearly an attempt by the militants to provide a response from India, thereby undermining the cease-fire. India has a right to defend its territory, and these defensive actions are consistent with the cease-fire. There are indications that the Kashmiri people welcome the cease- fire, despite the threats from the militants. According to a November 27 article in The Washington Post, entitled ``Kashmiris Hopeful as Truce Begins'': ``The cease-fire is a good thing for us, but unfortunately the militants do not agree,'' said Nazir Ahmed, 30, a mason in the village of Wathura, which was reduced to rubble early this month during a clash between rebels and security forces. ``I'm afraid there will be more killings, because one side wants to prove a point. In addition, there have been warning signs that some rebel groups have no intention of honoring the truce, which Vajpayee announced Nov. 19. Since then, there have been two attacks on civilians, including the killing of five Sikh and Hindu truck drivers on a Kashmiri highway. There has been speculation that the attacks were intended to drive a wedge between Muslims and people of other faiths in Kashmir at an especially sensitive moment, thus undermining the cease-fire. Such attacks must be condemned, in the name of human rights and fundamental decency. As to the broader issue of India's brave action, I urge the U.S. Government to express in the strongest terms our strong support for the difficult step for peace that India has taken.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the important contributions made by ADT Security Services, Inc., a security headquarters in my district in Boca Raton, Florida, to the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC). The NCPC is a private non-profit organization which has been working tirelessly to make our country safer from crime. The most prominent of their programs is the ``McGruff the Crime Dog'' public service advertising campaign, which is celebrating its 20th anniversary this year. Many of us are familiar with its ``Take a Bite out of Crime'' slogan. Some of their other valuable activities include providing technical assistance to communities, coordinating community demonstration projects, and producing award-winning publications for distribution to law enforcement, schools, and community organizations. ADT has sponsored activities of the NCPC since 1985, and ADT's supported has allowed the NCPC to develop and distribute the National Crime Prevention Survey and the annual October Crime Prevention Month kit. To celebrate McGruff's 20th anniversary, the NCPC also began a tour of the country to recognize those communities which have had significant reductions in crime as a result of coordinated prevention efforts. This tour is only possible as a result of ADT's support. Mr. Speaker, when corporations such as ADT give of their resources to improve communities, the results pay enormous dividends in the quality of life all Americans enjoy. I would like to express my best wishes for continued success to the partnership of ADT and the NCPC, as well as my pride to represent a company, such as ADT, in the House of Representatives.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, we are committed to defending this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. We must ask the question, who or what is our enemy? What is the greatest threat to our democracy? Mr. Speaker, our domestic enemies are hatred and intolerance. And hate manifests itself in many ways. Hate can provoke terrorists to commit unconscionable acts against innocent victims. Hate can provoke rogue leaders to persecute and intimidate members of an ethnic or religious group. And hate can provoke fearful and desperate people to terrorize whole communities by committing hate crimes. We must take action. We must protect our country against terrorist acts, we must protect ethnicities from genocide, and we must protect vulnerable communities from hate crimes. When a person terrorizes another, that person is guilty of a crime. When a person terrorizes a community, that person is guilty of a hate crime. Whether the community is a religious one, an ethnic one, or one of sexual orientation, it deserves protection. The nation was shocked at the murders of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., as well as the vile and senseless nature of the attitudes which prompted these crimes. Many more hate crimes occur throughout the country that do not receive the level of publicity of the Shepard and Byrd murders. We must work together to eliminate the underlying prejudices which kindle the hatred inherent in these crimes. We must also give our prosecutors the laws and resources they need to properly bring justice to the victims. Let me say again, hate crimes do not just victimize a person, they also terrorize a community. That is why they deserve recognition in the law for what they are--crimes that victimize a community. We must also be cognizant of protecting all vulnerable groups. Gender, sexual orientation, and disability should be included along with race, color, religion, and national origin as human characteristics which are subject to hate crimes and attacks and should receive the same federal protections. I ask that you support Congressman Conyers' motion to instruct conferees to include the Hate Crimes Act in the Defense Authorization bill.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3125. I strongly support this bill for three primary reasons: first, it gives law enforcement the ability to block offshore casino Web sites; second, the bill protects children from gambling; and, third, it protects the rights of States to continue governing a legal, regulated, taxpaying industry, the parimutuel industry. Parimutuel gaming is and always has been a State issue. States control parimutuel gaming, and they control it effectively. It is an industry that is highly regulated, pays taxes and has a respectable place in the States many of us represent. States do not, however, control casinos on Indian reservations. They certainly do not control offshore casino Web sites, of which there are at least 700, many of them in the Caribbean, which are not regulated and not taxed. I have heard concerns about cheating on the Internet. Parimutuel bets, however, are safe bets, equally safe made in person or at a simulcast. Finally, we do not have to worry about children logging on to the parimutuels and placing bets. Individuals would have to participate in a closed-loop subscriber-based service to wager on horses, greyhounds, or Jai-Alai. It does not get brought into the home unless a person wants it. The bill strikes a perfect balance for what is needed, a prohibition on Internet casino gambling and a preservation of the rights of States to regulate the parimutuel industry. References were made by my respected colleague and friend with respect to the effect of education dollars of this bill. Speaking as a representative of the State of Florida, let there be no mistake, the State lottery of Florida has not added, relatively, a single penny to the schools and to the education coffers of the State of Florida. Just the opposite. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the bill.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the amendment offered today by Mr. Weiner that will reduce funding for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service by over 15,000. This amount is more significant than its number, because it represents the APHIS budget that is used to administer Iranian agricultural imports to the United States. Mr. Chairman, thirteen Iranian Jews were arbitrarily arrested in March, 1999, and are about to be sentenced and condemned by the Iranian Revolutionary Court for crimes they did not commit. Now is not the time to send Iran symbolic victories. Not while the Iranian Court prepares to sentence the thirteen Iranian Jews who are on trial for their religious beliefs, not for anything they have done wrong. As my colleagues have pointed out, this sham trial was orchestrated by the Iranian government which refused to allow members of the Jewish community, diplomats, or human rights activists to be present in the courtroom and observe the trial. This sham trial undermines the progress we have been anticipating as a result of the recent Iranian elections--which raised our hopes and led to our lifting of sanctions on carpets, caviar, nuts, and dried fruits. Now is not the time to go further. We must not reward Iran for persecuting religious minorities including Jews, Bahai's and Christians. We must not reward the Iranian government for being the world's leading sponsor of terrorism. We must not reward them for doing everything in their power to destroy the Middle East peace process. And we must not reward the Iranian government for their intensive effort to build weapons of mass destruction. Now is the time for Iran to send the world a positive message. Mr. Chairman, we have an opportunity right now on the Floor of the House to send a clear message to the Iranian government that their treatment of the thirteen Iranian Jews is unacceptable and will not be rewarded. If Iran is to become a respected member of the international community, she must immediately end this show trial, release the Iranian Jews, and begin protecting the religious rights of all of her citizens. Until such time, Iran will remain a pariah nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important amendment.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, this Republican bill is bad medicine. Instead of providing prescription coverage for seniors, this bill provides political coverage for Republicans. Premiums are 40 percent higher than the Democratic plan. Worst of all, it puts seniors desperate for life-saving drugs at the mercy of greedy HMOs. Sorry Mom, one year you are covered, the next you are not. Instead of helping seniors get well, this plan helps insurance companies get wealthy. Mr. Speaker, seniors deserve a second opinion by allowing a vote on the Democratic plan which guarantees Medicare drug coverage. Republicans are guilty of congressional malpractice. And since they killed the Patients' Bill of Rights, we cannot even sue them. Who will this bill truly cover? Republicans on election day.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I think that there are two points that need to be made very clearly and could not be more dramatic. First and foremost, from here on in, nobody can say anything other than Israel has, in fact, fulfilled its obligations under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 425. As a result of Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon, could it also not be said that the ball is now in the court of the Lebanese people, their leadership, as well as the Syrian people and their leadership. This is an extraordinary opportunity for the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon to be an impetus for peace. But Israel's actions, as they represent a risk for peace, will only result in peace if they are followed by similar risks by the Lebanese government and the Syrian government. There can be no more excuses. Those that allege a fight in the name of some kind of redeployment or removal from Israel from Lebanon have no more excuses. It is time for Hezbollah to put down its arms. It is time for the United Nations to ensure peace in southern Lebanon and Israel's northern border. The world should be put at alarm because, for now, it is the Lebanese people and the Syrian leadership that have the opportunity to create a real and lasting peace. This resolution first and foremost sends our message, sends our strong will to the Israeli people and, at the same time, sends our great hope to the Lebanese people that they will reassert sovereignty over their country.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 429, expressing the serious concerns of the United States Congress over the participation of the extremist Freedom Party in the Government of Austria. Unfortunately, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), who had every intention of leading this debate, was delayed in flight. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for introducing this timely resolution. Its content echoes the sentiment of many in the international community who are deeply disturbed by events taking place in Austria. I know many of my colleagues were shocked and dismayed on February 4, 2000, when we learned that despite massive international opposition, Thomas Klestil, Austria's President and leader of the People'S Party, swore in a new government that included the Freedom Party, a xenophobic, right-wing organization, led by Mr. Haider, a dangerous extremist known for praising aspects of the Nazi era. The participation of the Freedom Party in the new Austrian government is deeply disturbing to all who remember recent European history. Mr. Haider has made several statements praising Adolf Hitler's orderly employment policies in lauding veterans of the Waffen SS as decent people of good character who stuck to their belief through the strongest headwinds. Haider and the FPO campaigned on a policy of racism and xenophobia, urging an immediate halt to the immigration in Austria due to the over foreignization of Austria. Haider also waged a campaign to expel all foreign workers. In 1997, he called for one-third of all foreigners to be sent home within 2 years. According to Haider, ``We take the right stand at the right time to save Austria against the dangers of the outside.'' The international community has responded strongly to the dangers posed by Mr. Haider and his party. Fourteen European Union members have banned bilateral contacts with Austria at the political level. They have also agreed to oppose Austrian candidates for positions in international organizations and have limited Austrian ambassadors to meetings on a technical level. Israel has withdrawn its ambassador in response to Haider's party joining the government. The intense pressure and worldwide opposition placed on Austria played an important role in forcing Mr. Haider to resign as Freedom Party chairman on February 29. However, we should not be confused about the true intentions of Mr. Haider as they relate to his control over the Freedom Party. In his own words, Mr. Haider stressed that his move, and I quote, ``is not a withdrawal from politics.'' Sixty years ago, Adolph Hitler followed a path of power similar to that of Mr. Haider. He, too, played on fear and xenophobic racist policies. Unfortunately, Austrian President Klestil's decision to include the FOP is a victory for neo-Nazi and far-right groups all across Europe. The president of Austria and Mr. Haider must understand that the United States will not tolerate any government that violates the rights of ethnic and religious minorities. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 429. Congress must speak out wherever human rights and democracy are threatened, as they are unfortunately today threatened in Austria.

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

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, President Clinton's trip to South Asia, home to one-fifth of the world's population and to two nuclear powers, reminds us of the volatility of the world around us. It reminds us as well of our obligation, as the world's remaining superpower and as the world's greatest exponent of democracy, to seek a strengthening of the democratic principles wherever we are. Over the years, we have forged a network of allies who have shared this burden with us, often at considerable human and economic cost to themselves. Few of our allies have been as important to us as Turkey. During the Cold War era, Turkey guarded NATO's southern flank. For five decades, Turkey stood as a bulwark against the Soviet Union's southern expansion. Its soldiers stood side by side with ours in Korea and its land was utilized by our armed forces for bases. During the Gulf War, Turkey was integral to our strategy for blunting and then defeating the aggression launched by Saddam Hussein. Turkish bases were the launching pad for the northern attacks and our large base at Incirlik continues to offer protection for Iraqi opposition as part of Operation Northern Watch. Turkey's alliance with us cost it $35 billion in foregone trade and pipeline fees--a sum whose equivalence in the U.S. context would be $900 billion. Today, even as the Cold War is a decade gone, Turkey remains one of our most steadfast and crucial allies. Their contributions to the United States, and the policies we seek to implement remain crucial to us. Let me offer several examples: Turkey is the only secular democracy in the Islamic world. At a time when Islamic fundamentalism and its attendant anti-American stance are on the rise, Turkey provides a model for the co-existence of Islam and a pluralistic society. Turkey is central to the containment of Saddam Hussein and ultimate removal of him from office. There can be no successful anti-Saddam strategy without the full involvement and support to Turkey. Turkey was the first Muslim nation to recognize Israel and remains one of only a few Muslim nations to establish full diplomatic relations with that nation. The two have forged close military and political linkages that serve as a means to help bring peace and security to the Middle East. Turkey will be home to new pipelines carrying oil and gas from the Caspian Basin to U.S. and Western markets. Turkey is integral to our long-term energy security. Turkey is partnering with the United States in an effort to provide economic and technical support to the emerging democracies from the former Soviet Union in order to help ensure their economic viability and democratic future. Turkey works with the United States in trying to stabilize the situation in the Balkans, and Turkey has taken the lead in trying to rebuild Bosnia. Mr. Speaker, the above examples demonstrate the fundamental importance of maintaining, and in fact expanding, strong U.S.-Turkish economic, defense and political ties. I am pleased that we continue to have a good and strong relationship with Turkey. It is vital in today's volatile world that such relations continue.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, recently, the world's oldest democracy, the United States, and the world's largest democracy, India, jointly agreed to work together to fight a common enemy--international terrorism. The agreement between our nation and India is a recognition that terrorism is a worldwide threat that singles out those nations who have consistently followed the democratic path. It is also recognition that we face a common foe--Osama bin Laden. The joint agreement to work together represents not only a combining of effort but represents as well as new area of cooperation between our two nations. This agreement builds on the strong relations existing between the United States and India. Just last week here in Washington, the first tangible expression of the joint agreement became evident. Representatives from the two countries held their first meeting as part of the Joint Working Group on Terrorism (JWG) under the leadership of the Department of State and India's Ministry of External Affairs. Other organizations represented at the meeting included the United States Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, India's Home Ministry and its Intelligence Bureau. According to the JWG, the first joint action is to apprehend and bring to trial the hijackers of Indian Airlines Flight 814 who used innocent civilians as bargaining chips to further their terrorist ends. But the working group has a larger agenda, eradicating terrorism and those who sponsor or finance it. I rise today, Mr. Speaker to applaud our joint efforts with India. This is an initiative that is long overdue. If their efforts result in success, whether in the capture of the Indian Airlines hijackers, or in the reduction of terrorism itself, the citizenry of our two democracies, and the citizens of all the world's democracies, will be well served.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1598.

Mr. WEXLER

Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the Foreign Operations conference report. America loses when we fail to properly fund our foreign operations budget. The report we are considering is almost $2 billion below the level requested by President Clinton and $1 billion below last year's budget. Without adequate funding for our international affairs operations, we will not be equipped to protect the security and the prosperity of Americans at home and abroad, and we risk losing our status as the world's remaining superpower. American foreign policy should not embrace the short-sighted views of isolationists. Instead, we should meet the myriad of challenges facing the global community. America is at its best when we promote our values abroad by supporting struggling democracies and their efforts to make the transition to market economies. Mr. Speaker, this conference report provides no Wye Aid funding which we promised our partners in the Middle East. It fails to provide adequate funding for emerging democracies in Africa and fails to assist our neighbors in the Western Hemisphere. It also ignores the needs of Asian countries recovering from financial devastation. But the greatest disgrace of this conference report is our failure to lend a helping hand to the world's children. The children of Sierra Leone, for example, who have suffered the violent amputation of their limbs, sexual abuse, displacement from their homes, and the ravaging to their innocence and youth, lose yet again when we cut our foreign aid and humanitarian assistance. Programs to provide them food and medical intervention and to return them to their homes and neighborhoods can never succeed. And yet, what greater humanitarian purpose can our foreign policy serve than to bring prosthetic arms and hands to babies whose entire lives lie ahead of them? I urge my colleagues to join me today and defeat this poorly funded conference report. America's front line of foreign policy should not be shortchanged.