Anthony Weiner

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, in 1913, a little girl name Rosa Louise McCauley was born in Alabama. As she grew up, her mother, Leona McCauley, encouraged her daughter to ``take advantage of the opportunities, no matter how few they were,'' and she did just that. In 1932, she married Raymond Parks, an active participant in civil rights causes. The couple joined the Voters League in the 1940s. On December 1, 1955, Rosa Parks' life changed forever and she became an icon of the civil rights movement when she refused to give up her seat on a public bus to make extra room for white passengers. She was arrested and convicted of disorderly conduct for violating a local ordinance. Parks' arrest led to the formation of the Montgomery Improvement Association, which organized a boycott of public buses until the U.S Supreme Court ruled that Montgomery's policy of segregation on buses was unconstitutional. Later, Parks moved to Michigan, where Rosa initially worked as a seamstress and later as an aide to the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers, from 1965 to 1988. She cofounded the Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development in 1987 with, which sponsors a summer bus tour for teenagers that were interested in learning the history of America and civil rights. Yesterday, at the age of 92, Rosa Parks passed away. Her contributions to American history will never be forgotten. Her dedication to the cause of civil rights will be sorely missed, but her legacy will live on forever.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank the bipartisan leadership of the Judiciary Committee for its hard work shepherding through this powerful reauthorization of Department of Justice activities, a bill that I strongly support. The bill authorizes a total of $95 billion, including $24.4 billion for the FBI, $7.25 billion for the Drug Enforcement Administration, and $6.85 billion for U.S. Attorneys. It is a true victory that the committee leadership included reauthorization of the landmark Violence Against Women Act in this bill. It is essential that Congress stands strong and protects victims of domestic violence and other crimes against women. The bill's new $15 million a year grant program will help colleges and universities prevent dating violence, sexual assault and stalking on campuses. Mr. Chairman, as this bill moves to conference, I want to highlight two provisions that was included in the original text of H.R. 3402 at my request. Section 321 will close loopholes that have allowed those impersonating police officers to evade conviction, while section 253 reauthorizes the Community Oriented Policing Services grant program, and makes it easier for local police departments to apply for and win grants by consolidating it into a single grant program. Whereas cities used to submit different application for hiring, and one for overtime and one for technology and one for training--this language allows them to only have to submit one application. Section 321, language inserted in the original bill at my request and based upon the Badge Security Enhancement Act of 2003, amends criminal prohibitions on the use of a false badge to close loopholes used by many to evade prosecution and conviction. No longer will criminals be able to claim that they badges the use to impersonate police officers are just souvenirs or collectors items. Instead, my language amends the criminal code so that the only acceptable defense for possessing a counterfeit police badge is for use in a dramatic production or for a legitimate law enforcement purpose. There are countless website where one can purchase a very convincing NYPD police badge and then use it to commit a crime. It is common sense that we close these loopholes in order to protect the public and our law enforcement personnel. Also, language offered by Mrs. Slaughter expands the criminal ban on counterfeit police badges to also include the misuse of uniforms, identification, and all other insignia of all public officials, but maintains my language that limits acceptable defenses in the case of counterfeit badges. Mr. Chairman, I consider reauthorization of the COPS program to be a singular triumph of this bill. By reauthorizing the program at $1.05 billion a year for 4 years, we are providing a valuable resource to local law enforcement as they fight crime and protect the homeland from terrorist threats. Throughout its history, the COPS program has put more than 118,000 cops on the beat in more than 12,000 communities, and added 7,407 officers to the force in New York City. This is the ultimate democratic program, with a small ``d,'' as it benefits small towns and big cities alike throughout our country. The reauthorization amount in the bill will pay for an estimated 13,000 new cops on the beat nationally each year, and 3,640 NYFD officers over the length of this authorization. The reauthorization will also allow Federal funds for the first time to flow to hiring officers to perform intelligence, anti-terror and homeland security duties. These are federal responsibilities and this language will help special terrorism units throughout the country, such as those at the NYFD and the LAPD. I have also worked with Mr. Rothman to ensure that $30 million a year of the COPS reauthorization goes to the Secure our Schools Program to make grants for school security, including installing metal detectors, personnel and student training, and coordination with local law enforcement. Authorities across the country agree that COPS works. A GAG report issued this summer that found a 13 percent drop in violent crime because of COPS. Former Attorney General Ashcroft once said of COPS in June 2003 that, ``Let me just say that I think the COPS program has been successful. The purpose of the COPS program was to demonstrate to local police departments that if you put additional people, feet on the street, that crime could be affected and that people would be safer and more secure. We believe that the COPS program demonstrated that conclusively.'' I would like to thank advocates both in this House and in the law enforcement community who have stood with me and fought for COPS reauthorization. The COPS program is endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, International Association of Chiefs of Police, International Brotherhood of Police Officers, National Association of Police Organizations, National Sheriffs' Association, U.S. Conference of Mayors. The PROTECTION Act, offered to reauthorize COPS for 6 years in 2004 had 224 cosponsors. I would like to thank Ms. Linda Sanchez and Mr. Keller for their support, and commend our committee's leaders, Mr. Conyers and Chairman Sensenbrenner for agreeing to include COPS reauthorization in this very important piece of legislation. In particular, I would like to thank both the Democratic and Republican staff of the Judiciary Committee, both of whom worked tirelessly on this piece of legislation, and who deserve the entire House's thanks. I would like to extend my gratitude to Sampak Garg, Perry Apelbaum and Ted Kalo of Mr. Conyers' staff and Beth Sokul, Katy Crooks, Sean McLaughlin and Michael Volkov of Mr. Sensenbrenner's staff, who all worked with me on these important provisions in the bill.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank the leadership of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for their hard work shepherding through the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2005, and to express my strong support of the bill. It authorizes $8.7 billion for the Coast Guard for fiscal 2006, which will be used to perform the essential duties of the U.S. Coast Guard in the areas of homeland security, maritime safety, law enforcement, and environmental protection. Mr. Chairman, I want to highlight a provision that I offered and was accepted by the Committee that directs the Coast Guard to conduct a study of the pollution in Newtown Creek caused by underground oil spills in Brooklyn, N.Y. Newtown Creek is a 3.5 mile long waterway that flows from the East River and separates the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. The State of New York has ruled that the Creek does not meet water quality standards under the Clean Water Act. It is the single most polluted waterway in New York City, and its banks are home to the largest oil spill in the United States. The spill is 150 percent the size of the Exxon-Valdez spill. In 1978, a Coast Guard patrol detected petroleum on the surface of Newtown Creek and identified a spill that spreads from the banks of the Creek through the Greenpoint neighborhood in Brooklyn. Evaluations at that time identified a spill totaling 17 million gallons attributed to refineries operated along the banks of the Creek by the predecessors to ExxonMobil, BP/Amoco and Chevron-Texaco. To date, 8.7 millions gallons have been cleaned but estimates indicate it will take at least 25 more years to finish the remediation, primarily conducted by ExxonMobil under a 1990 consent agreement with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Even though it has been over 25 years since the oil spill was detected, the public health and safety risks associated with the oil spill are still unknown. The legislative intent of the amendment that directs the Coast Guard to study Newtown Creek (Creek) is for the Coast Guard to revisit the findings of its July 1979 report entitled ``Investigation of Underground Accumulation of Hydrocarbons along Newtown Creek,'' and address the following issues: The actual current size of the Greenpoint Oil Spill (Spill) and the extent to which oil from each refinery site contributes to the Spill. The extent and severity of surface water pollution and sediment contamination from the Spill, and methods to prevent further seepage into the Creek. The Spill's impact on existing conditions in the Creek including but not limited to low levels of dissolved oxygen and high levels of bacteria. The interaction between pollution from the Spill and pollution from other sources in the Creek including but not limited to Combined Sewer Overflow Pipes and the Newtown Creek Sewage Treatment Plant. The extent to which oil and contaminated sediments in the Creek disperse into New York Harbor. The extent to which the Spill has affected aquatic species in the Creek and Harbor, and methods to prevent further harm. The extent to which the Spill has affected groundwater in the surrounding area, and methods to prevent further harm. The extent and severity of contaminated soil in the area affected by the Spill, and methods to prevent further harm. Any public health issues raised by the Spill and the current remediation efforts, both independently and in interaction with other pollutants in the Creek. Any safety issues raised by the Spill and the current remediation efforts, both independently and in interaction with other pollutants in the Creek. The extent to which the current remediation efforts are sufficient, and any new technologies or approaches that could accelerate product recovery and/or improve the scope of the remediation. I would like to express my thanks to Chairman Young, Mr. Oberstar, Chairman LoBiondo, and Mr. Filner for their willingness to work with me on this very important yet often overlooked issue. The country will benefit from renewed Federal attention on this oil spill, the largest in the country. Additionally, I would like to thank both the Democratic and Republican staff of the Transportation Committee and the Subcommittee on the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation. In particular, Ward McCarragher and John Cullather of Mr. Oberstar's staff and Fraser Verrusio and John Rayfield of Mr. Young's staff were very helpful.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to congratulate the conferees on completing their work to fund our nation's transportation needs for the next 5 years. Mr. Young, Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Petri and Mr. DeFazio in particular deserve credit for clearing the final legislative hurdle to making SAFETEA-LU a reality. After 11 extensions of TEA-21 and two years of debate, I am glad to see this day come. As a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that approved a $375 billion highway authorization bill in 2003, I supported H.R. 3 when it passed the House despite feeling that more funding was needed. I was happy to see that the total funding package in the conference report totals $286.4 billion, a 30 percent increase over the total highway funding in the last authorization bill passed in 1998. I wish the Congress had followed the Department of Transportation's own needs assessment and funded the bill at $375 billion, but I accept this compromise as a way to get much needed money to states and localities that need it now. New York City will see a 23 percent increase in overall funding under this bill, about $8.5 billion dollars overall. In highway funds the city will benefit from about $3 billion, a 19 percent increase; and in transit funds the city will see $5.5 billion, a 30 percent increase. The 19 percent increase in New York City and state highway funding is of the utmost importance: it grows the state's federal funding stream above the rate of inflation and will allow for planned development to proceed. On the matter of the minimum guarantee, I am a firm believer that states like New York should not be punished for having efficient transportation systems that keep fuel consumption down. I advocated for a 90.5 percent minimum guarantee in the bill. Given that some of my colleagues had called for a 95 percent minimum guarantee to favor states like Texas, I accept the conference report's 90.5 percent minimum guarantee that balloons to 92 percent by 2008. I would also like to commend the conferees for settling on Senate language related to grants under the Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure Program. The language in the conference report will allow for new contracts to be awarded as the program expands into new cities instead of making all new projects subject to the old sole- source contract. In each case the state transportation agency will be required to consent to any grant award made. This arrangement will promote competition among vendors and place all firms capable of installing and operating traffic data collection infrastructure on a level playing field. Mr. Speaker, I have worked hard to ensure that this bill will make significant improvements to the lives of ordinary New Yorkers. Included in this bill are a number of projects that will enhance transportation throughout New York City and in my district in particular. At my urging, the bill includes: $15,000,000 for the New York City Department of Transportation to build the facilities and purchase the ferry boats necessary to establish high speed ferry service between the Rockaway Peninsula and Manhattan. $500,000 to help the New York State Department of Transportation install two permanent variable message signs that will display amber alert messages on the Belt Parkway. $250,000 for the New York City Department of Transportation to study and implement pedestrian safety enhancements in Gerritsen Beach, Brooklyn. $1,000,000 for the New York City Department of Transportation to study and implement traffic improvements to the area surrounding the Stillwell Avenue train station in Coney Island, New York. $600,000 for each of the boroughs of New York City to make improvements to pedestrian safety, allocated within each borough according to feedback collected on my website from New York City residents. $250,000 for the areas surrounding each of 10 schools in New York City. Those funds are to be spent on efforts to improve pedestrian safety surrounding those 10 schools. Students walking to IS Q114 in Belle Harbor, PS Q200 in Electchester, PS K124 in Park Slope, PS K277 in Gerritsen Beach, Prospect Park Yeshiva in Midwood, PS X81 in Riverdale, IS X194 in Parkchester, IS R72/PS R69 in New Springville, PS Q153 in Maspeth, and St. Roberts Bellarmine in Bayside will all be better protected by improvements installed with funding provided in TEA-LU. $500,000 to make improvement to pedestrian safety in the Riverdale neighborhood of the Bronx in consultation with Rep. Eliot Engel and New York State Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz. $500,000 for pedestrian safety improvements on Queens Boulevard. $700,000 to abate noise emanating from I-95, I-278, Mosholu Parkway, I-495, Grand Central Parkway, and Richmond Parkway: all state roadways located within New York City that are paved with concrete. ``Diamond grinding'' measures should significantly improve the quality of life of those residing within earshot of those roadways. $550,000 to improve the roadways surrounding the Brooklyn Children's Museum. $1,000,000 to be used to build a new facility for the Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department. $5,750,000 to be used by the Doe Fund to establish a graffiti elimination program throughout the city of New York. It is my intent that my $4.75 million project for graffiti removal in Queens, Brooklyn, Staten Island and the Bronx be used in the neighborhoods of Woodside, Bensonhurst, Boerum Hill, Astoria, Cobble Hill, Windsor Terrace, Hollis Wood, Park Slope, Kensington, Glendale, Borough Park, Williamsburg, Carroll Gardens, Whitestone, Jamaica Estates, Bath Beach, Dyker Heights, Crown Heights, Flatbush, Midwood, Jamaica Hills, Grand Street, and Kings Highway from Ocean Parkway to McDonald Avenue. It is further my intent that $250,000 of this money will be applied to the Soundview, Castle Hill, Throgs Neck and Morris Park neighborhoods in the Bronx, at the urging of Rep. Joseph Crowley. I have also included $500,000 for Smith Street in Brooklyn and $500,000 for the Riverdale neighborhood. $2,000,000 to improve transportation facilities in the vicinity of West 65th Street and Broadway in conjunction with the major capital improvements being done at Lincoln Center. $500,000 to be equally distributed at five locations in New York City for the New York City Department of Transportation to enhance the enforcement of truck routes. The five locations are: The Long Island Expressway Eastbound Service Road at 74th Street to Caldwell Ave, Grand Ave from 69th Street to Flushing Ave, and Eliot Ave from 69th Street to Woodhaven Blvd Avenue P between Coney Island Avenue and Ocean Avenue in the 9th District of New York The 9th Street and 3rd Avenue intersection in Brooklyn From Broadway to Irwin Ave between 232 to 231 in the neighborhood of Kingsbridge, New York Victory Blvd Between Travis Ave and West Shore Expressway Travis Section of Staten Island $300,000 for Gateway National Park to improve the Riis Park Boardwalk. $2,000,000 to be used to improve traffic flow in the vicinity of the Atlantic Yards Development in Brooklyn. $1,000,000 to be used by City and State Agencies to improve homeland security at bridges and tunnels throughout New York City. $500,000 to improve the roads and facilities at the Kew Gardens Long Island Rail Road Terminal. $950,000 to design and construct a bicycle and pedestrian walkway along the decommissioned Putnam Rail Line in the Bronx at the advice of Representative Eliot Engel. $2,000,000 to improve 125th Street in Harlem in conjunction with improvements being made by Columbia University. $2,000,000 to implement congestion reduction measures on Staten Island at the urging of New York State Assemblyman Michael Cusick. $500,000 to install traffic safety measures at the intersection of Rockaway Point Boulevard and Reid Avenue in the Breezy Point neighborhood. $1,400,000 to repair and improve streets in Astoria, Queens that were damaged by water main breaks. $836,000 to help Easter Seals purchase and equip cars that provide livery service to disabled New Yorkers. And $836,000 to establish a bus rapid transit system at a location to be determined in consultation with the Transportation Workers Union. Bus rapid transit uses a variety of traffic improvements, like exclusive bus lanes and coordinated signal changing, to speed bus travel on congested city routes. These high priority projects will make a considerable contribution to the lives of New York City residents. I could not have secured these and other programs within TEA-LU without the help and counsel of individuals here in Washington, as well as in Albany and New York City. In particular, I would like to thank both the Democratic and Republican staff of the Transportation Committee, both of whom worked tirelessly on this piece of legislation, and who deserve the entire Congress' thanks. In particular, I would like to thank Ken House, Eric VanSchyndle, Ward McCarragher, Kathleen Zern, David Heymsfeld, and Dara Schleiker of Mr. Oberstar's staff. I would also like to thank Tom Kearney, Tom Herritt and their colleagues at the Albany Office of the Federal Highway Administration, Nancy Ross, Fred Neveu, Ron Epstein and their colleagues at the New York State Department of Transportation, and Andra Horsch and David Woloch and their colleagues at the New York City Department of Transportation.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I think all of the assembled Parliamentarians, staffers, the histrionics of the other side, the apoplexy over the idea that perhaps we might actually reduce premiums is fairly instructive to this debate. We had no hearings on this. We had no chance to mark it up. We had no chance to include a reduction in premiums. The gentleman from Georgia said this is a pro-consumer thing. If you really wanted it to be pro-consumer, you would reduce premiums. I would ask any Member on the other side of the aisle who supports this bill to simply say, We do not really care about reducing premiums. Mr. Speaker, who we are fighting for in this bill is the insurance industry; they are getting protected. The HMOs, they are getting protected. The pharmaceutical companies, that is who is being protected by H.R. 5. But, frankly, do not deceive the American public by what this bill will do. Insurance prices will not go down. Do Members know how we know this? First of all, the industry themselves have said in public that they have no intention of reducing premiums if this legislation is passed. We can look at other States that have caps. Find me one where insurance premiums went down. Look at California, ask them whether their premiums have gone down. Frankly, the only way we know for sure that premiums will go down is to cap the premiums, but you will not do that. Not only will you not do that; you will do everything possible to avoid even considering it. That is why committee was bypassed. And do not also say that doctors are going to face fewer claims as a result of this legislation. They are already seeing fewer claims since they did in 2001. There were 25 per 1,000 physicians in 2001. There are 19 per 1,000 physicians in 2003. If we had a hearing in committee, we might find out what it is this year. You cannot say that, and you also cannot say this: you cannot say the amount being paid out in claims against physicians has reduced in States where there are caps. You want us to be a Nation where there are caps. Let us look at the States where the caps are in place. The lowest number of claims per 1,000 physicians is in a State that does not have a cap, and the highest are among the States that do have the caps. What this issue is really all about, it is about who you all are fighting for and who we are fighting for. You are fighting to take away the right of a jury. Your citizens, your constituents who apparently are brilliant enough to elect you, but not smart enough to solve a case that deals with medical malpractice, you are taking the right of a family who wants to take on a megapharmaceutical company or a mega-HMO, and the only way they can bring that suit is to make sure they get enough money out of that company that they learn the lesson and they do not do it again. Mr. Speaker, there is some irony here. You control the legislature, you control the executive, you control the judiciary, and still you do not trust any of those people to make the decisions. Only you know how much each and every one of these cases will yield. Mr. Speaker, I have an alternative idea: get rid of the bad doctors, get rid of the bad lawyers, get rid of the bad judges, and get rid of this bad bill.

Mr. WEINER. No, I want to be heard on my unanimous consent, and I was recognized.

Mr. WEINER. Certainly. My unanimous consent request is that H.R. 5 be amended by unanimous consent, the consent here of both the majority and the minority, that premium increases, health insurance premium increases, be limited to zero for the duration of the period of this bill.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, if I can be further heard on the unanimous consent request, and I believe the paperwork is on the way, it is a very simple matter. The sponsor of the legislation says he wants to do what is right for consumers. Over and over we have heard the connection between the legislation and reducing premiums. All I am saying is, if we all agree upon that, let us include the language herein.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I have been recognized, so that is not the issue. Is the issue the form of the unanimous consent request?

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry. Is the concern that it is not in proper form? There has not been a point of order that it is not germane.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. I am making a unanimous consent request.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry. Is the Chair ruling a unanimous consent request which expresses the unanimous desire of the House of Representatives, is the Chair refusing that to be put to the body?

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I still have a unanimous consent that is, I believe, in the hands of the Parliamentarian now. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my unanimous consent request.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I move by unanimous request that we amend H.R. 5 to include a cap on premium increases for the duration of the bill.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, Sunday July 10, 2005 (3 Tamuz, 5765), marked the eleventh anniversary of the passing of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory. When Rabbi Schneerson first became the Rebbe, or spiritual leader, of Chabad-Lubavitch, the movement had barely survived the brutality of the Holocaust. Yet, over the course of his 44 years as ``The Rebbe,'' Rabbi Schneerson turned Chabad-Lubavitch into a worldwide movement. Under the Rebbe's leadership, Chabad-Lubavitch began to offer educational and social services to the elderly, ill, and infirm. Over time, and under Rabbi Schneerson's leadership, Chabad-Lubavitch became a global force for good-will and kindness. It is not surprising therefore, that upon Rabbi Schneerson's passing, both this House, as well as the Senate, voted unanimously to award him the Congressional Gold Medal. It is a testament to the Rebbe's leadership that Chabad-Lubavitch's social, educational, and humanitarian efforts did not cease upon his passing. In fact, Chabad-Lubavitch presently has over four thousand emissaries operating more than three thousand institutions around the globe. Chabad-Lubavitch offers vital outreach and social services to communities in more than sixty countries on six continents. In the wake of the devastating Tsunami in South-East Asia, Chabad- Lubavitch responded to the crisis in a manner consistent with Rabbi Schneerson's teachings and leadership. Chabad-Lubavitch of Thailand has extended a helping hand to all Tsunami victims and survivors, regardless of race or religion. Chabad-Lubavitch has provided both funding and technical assistance to local relief organizations in order to support the local relief effort. Chabad-Lubavitch also provides interest free loans to Tsunami survivors in order to assist in the economic recovery of individuals and communities. Chabad-Lubavitch also participates in an ongoing effort to provide fresh food and drinking water to the villages of Koh Muk, Laem Naew, Baan Talae Nok, Ko Rah, Bak Jok, Ko Surin, and Tung Dap. Mr. Speaker, while we continue to honor Rabbi Schneerson's memory, we must also celebrate his ongoing legacy of kindness and compassion.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. First of all, let me just say to the chairman and the ranking member, they have done an excellent job with a limited budget. But I think we should give them an extra $25,000 to work with by saying that we are not going to provide comfort to the Saudis, we are not going to provide aid, taxpayer aid to the Saudi Arabians. This is not just the position of a bipartisan group here in Congress. The Council on Foreign Relations has said for years individuals and charities based in Saudi Arabia have been the most important source of funds for al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission said Saudi Arabia is ``a problematic ally in fighting Islamic extremism.'' Our own State Department says Hamas receives funding from ``private benefactors in Saudi Arabia.'' There is not probably an observer of the scene today that does not recognize that Saudi Arabia has done a very deft two-face game. They come here, they send us a moderate face. They have convinced, obviously, our State Department, who walks along almost in lock step with everything that they say. We here in Congress should say we understand that we are going to start judging nations in the post-September 11 world by what they do, not by what they say. And what the Saudi Arabians have done is export Wahabiism to the United States, export terrorism to the troops in Iraq, and export terror all around the world. Vote ``yes'' on the Weiner/Ferguson amendment. Let us finally put an end to it.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I want to respond to a couple of things that the chairman said. For 3 years now, I have heard the argument for continued support for the Saudis as two somewhat contradictory positions. One, it is not a lot of money; and two, they are getting better. Well, I think it is incumbent upon all of us, particularly in this bill when we are already short-funded, to justify why it is we provide any money at all if they are not an ally. If they are not espousing U.S. American views, if they are not improving democracy, what are they doing? I will tell you what they are doing, Mr. Chairman. They are traveling to Iraq and blowing up our troops. That is not according to me; that is according to their own bragging Web sites and The Washington Post assessment about who they are. There is a dramatic increase in the amount of violence since we offered this bill last year, not a decline. There is a dramatic increase in the exporting of Wahabiism, not a decline. And there is no sign of greater cooperation. You know, a sign of great cooperation is not hiring a very expensive lobbyist here, running TV ads, running newspaper ads. A sign of cooperation is saying we are going to start cracking down on terror, not moving it out of our country into someone else's problem. The problem that we face here, whether it is $25,000, $25 million or $25 billion, is we articulate our values in this bill. And our values are simply not to be supportive of the Saudi Arabian Government. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson).

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. WEINER. Is this the appropriate place in the reading for a limiting amendment?

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to make it very clear that it has been the Saudi policy to export their worst troublemakers like bin Laden, like Wahabiism, so that the problem is not turned inward. That is their policy.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, perhaps the more appropriate question about this amendment is not why should we restrict any funds in this bill from going to the Nation of Saudi Arabia, but why should we allow any funds from this or any other budget to be going to Saudi Arabia. There is not much in the bill, but there is $25,000 for the Saudis, the IMET program. More importantly, that money triggers allocations in future bills that permit the Saudis to buy U.S. arms at a discounted rate. The administration, when they were asked to justify why we would give any money to a nation that exports terror, a nation that is getting almost $60 for a barrel of crude oil, here is what they say in their State Department budget justification: ``While Saudi Arabia controls the world's largest oil reserve, it faces an increasing budget pressure.'' So I guess one of the reasons we are providing aid to the Saudis is because of their budget pressures. Frankly, we have heard a great deal over the course of years; in fact, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, who has done a terrific job on this bill in many ways, has argued in the past that the Saudis are doing better, they are doing better at cracking down on crime. But on May 28 of 2005, Syria arrested 300 Saudis trying to cross the border into Iraq to join the Jihad against the United States. I would say to my colleagues in the House that if you are relying on Syria to crack down on terrorism against Saudi Arabia, you know you have trouble. Recently, a report in The Washington Post analyzed all of the Web sites where Jihadists brag about their so-called martyrdom, places where they list those who have given their lives so that they can blow up others, including our troops. They concluded that 70 percent of the homicide bombers on Islamic extremist Web sites are Saudis. Sixty-one percent of the Arab martyrs in Iraq are Saudis. This is just in recent months, in recent times since our last bill passed. According to Ambassador Dory Gold, in testimony before a Subcommittee of the House Committee on International Relations in July of 2003, at least 50 percent of the funding for Hamas is Saudi blood money. We all know the history of Osama bin Laden. When he left Saudi Arabia, he did so with, by some estimates, nearly $1 billion of Saudi blood money which was subsequently used, as we know, to attack my city, and others. The time has come for us to say once again, just as we did last year in this bill, no aid to Saudi Arabia, no aid to a country that exports Wahabisim, no aid to a country that exports terrorism, no aid to a country that has been worse than uncooperative in our efforts to control worldwide oil prices. There is no other way to view the Saudis except as our enemies, not as our friends. Nothing, I think, was more troubling for many of us than to see the President waiting in Crawford, Texas for over an hour while the Crown Prince came and then gave a lecture to our President on the way to fight terrorism. The way we in the House should fight terrorism is to not provide any more aid to the Saudis, and my amendment would do that. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. WEINER

Mr. WEINER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my steadfast support of H.R. 2827, a Private Bill for the relief of Malachy McAllister, Nicola McAllister, and Sean Ryan McAllister offered by my friend from New Jersey, Mr. Rothman. I would also like to recognize my colleagues Mr. Engel and Mr. King of New York for their advocacy on behalf of the McAllisters. Malachy McAllister is an Irish Catholic national who fled to the United States from Belfast in 1988. He left his homeland and moved to New York City with his wife and four children. Since then, Mr. McAllister has been living in the New York metropolitan area, building a new, safe home for his family, abiding by the laws of our land, and contributing to society. Unfortunately, the Bush administration seems intent on deporting him to a country where his life will be put in danger. While in Northern Ireland, Mr. McAllister did participate in an Irish National Liberation Army attack on a member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and played a role in planning another attack. He was imprisoned from 1981 to 1985, and has paid his debt to society. When released from prison, he and his family were attacked by British loyalists who fired 26 shots into his home. After fleeing to the United States he applied for political asylum, which was denied to him in 2000 and to his children and deceased wife in 2003. The McAllisters have appealed the decisions to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, but they have no further legal options if the appeal is denied. The House and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff should act to ensure that Mr. McAllister and his family can stay in America. H.R. 2827 makes Malachy, Nicola and Sean eligible for permanent resident status and halts pending deportation proceedings. If Mr. McAllister is returned to Northern Ireland, he will be in constant and immediate danger of persecution because of his political and religious beliefs and retribution for his past affiliations. As a member of the House Judiciary Committee, I believe the McAllisters should be granted political asylum. In the wake of September 11, we must make sure to balance security concerns with the historical role of the United States as a place of safe harbor for individuals fleeing political oppression. Mr. McAllister is the first person to express regret for his past actions and sorrow that they have led to his family's current position. He and his children deserve to live free of fear and continue building their American Dream.