To improve the Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of an amendment to support human rights in Vietnam. This important amendment will impose a significant penalty on the dictators in Hanoi for their ongoing and egregious persecution of their own people.

During the 107th Congress, I introduced H.R. 2833, legislation designed to address the human rights situation in Vietnam. It passed the House by an overwhelming 410-1 margin, but stalled in the Senate. This year, I introduced nearly identical legislation, H.R. 1587, with 30 original cosponsors.

Many felt that the ratification of the Bilateral Trade Agreement with Vietnam in 2001 would lead to an improvement in human rights. Unfortunately, the human rights situation in Vietnam has deteriorated dramatically since this agreement, especially for Montagnard Christians in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Legislation to address the serious human rights situation is needed now more than ever.

In late 2002 the Government of Vietnam launched a fresh wave of arrests and crackdowns against peaceful critics of the Vietnamese government, its policy of repression, and its corrupt practices. Unfortunately, Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, one of the country's greatest human rights leaders who has already endured two lengthy prison sentences, was arrested on March 17. This is a government that consistently pursues a policy of harassment, discrimination, and intimidation, and, increasingly in the last three years, imprisonment and other forms of detention, against those who peacefully express dissent from government's extreme policies against religion and freedom. This is a government that punishes not just individuals who oppose them, but also often their family members.

At its Seventh Plenum in January 2003, the Communist Party's Central Committee issued a resolution calling for the establishment of cells of Communist Party members within each of Vietnam's six approved religions in order to foil ``hostile forces.'' All religious groups in Vietnam face great restrictions and suffer some form of persecution.

To address these and other abuses, my amendment, based on the text of H.R. 1587: requires the President to issue a certification each year on the progress of the regime towards respecting human rights; prohibits an increase in nonhumanitarian U.S. assistance unless the regime shows improvement; seeks to fund the efforts of NGOs who promote democracy in Vietnam and help to overcome the jamming of Radio Free Asia; helps ensure continued access of refugees to our refugee resettlement programs; and requires the State Department to give detailed reports about the status of human rights in Vietnam that include victims lists.

Unfortunately, the list of human rights abuses carried out by the regime goes on and on. Buddhists, Protestants, Catholics and members of indigenous Vietnamese religions are subject to persecutions that include detention and imprisonment of both religious leaders and believers, church closings, and confiscation of religious and personal property. One of the most courageous religious leaders imprisoned is Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest.

Tens of thousands of children suffer exploitation as workers and many Vietnamese suffer

under the government's official export labor program, in which the government forces its own people to endure involuntary servitude and debt bondage.

As Chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, I am particularly concerned about the continued persecution of the Montagnards, who were some of our greatest allies during the war. Many of our pilots are alive today and have families because they were rescued by Montagnards after bailing out of downed aircraft. We receive numerous and credible reports that allege that Montagnards are being imprisoned, tortured and systematically relocated to infertile lands by the Communist Party leaders in retaliation for their past loyalty to America. This past December, Vietnamese soldiers reportedly threatened to shoot Montagnard Christians if they celebrated Christmas, and several were arrested and tortured.

I would like to submit the findings of H.R. 1587, which lay out a more complete case of Human Rights in Vietnam, to the Congressional Record. They were kept out of this amendment because of their length, but they speak loudly with respect to the regime and the world about the egregious human rights abuses occurring in Vietnam.

Vietnam's continued policy of harassment, discrimination, intimidation, and persecution of religious and human rights leaders is shameful. The Vietnam Human Rights amendment in the State Department Authorization Bill sends as strong a message that this persecution and tyranny will not be tolerated.

Findings From H.R. 1587, ``The Vietnam Human Rights Act''

Congress finds the following:

(1) Viet Nam is a one-party state, ruled and controlled by

the Vietnamese Communist Party.

(2)(A) The Government of Viet Nam denies the people of Viet

Nam the right to change their government and prohibits

independent political, social, and labor organizations.

(B) The Government of Viet Nam prohibits and hinders the

formation of civil society in Viet Nam.

(3)(A) The Government of Viet Nam consistently pursues a

policy of harassment, discrimination, and intimidation, and

sometimes of imprisonment and other forms of detention,

against those who peacefully express dissent from government

or party policy. This policy includes collectively punishing

family members of individuals targeted for persecution. A

government decree allows detention without trial for 6 months

to 2 years.

(B) Following the United States ratification of the

Bilateral Trade Agreement with Viet Nam in 2001, the human

rights situation in Viet Nam has remained extremely poor. For

certain groups, such as the Montagnards, and other ethnic

minorities in Central and North Vietnam, conditions have

deteriorated dramatically. In late 2002, the Government of

Viet Nam launched a fresh wave of arrests and crackdowns

against peaceful critics of the Vietnamese Government, its

policy of repression, and its corrupt practices.

(C) Recent victims of such mistreatment, which violates the

rights to freedom of expression and association recognized in

the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, include Dr. Nguyen

Dan Que, a leading human rights activist who was arrested on

March 17, 2003, and has already served two lengthy prison

sentences, Dr. Nguyen Thanh Giang, Most Venerable Thich Huyen

Quang, Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, linguist Tran Khue,

businessman Nguyen Khac Toan, journalist Nguyen Vu Binh,

publicist Le Chi Quang, writer Hoang Tien, military historian

Pham Que Duong, Hoang Minh Chinh, Tran Dung Tien, Hoang Trong

Dung, Nguyen Vu Viet, Nguyen Truc Cuong, Nguyen Thi Hoa, Vu

Cao Quan, Nguyen The Dam, Nguyen Thi Thanh Xuan, Father Chan

Tin, author Duong Thu Huong, poet Bui Minh Quoc, Dr. Nguyen

Xuan Tu (Ha Si Phu), Dr. Pham Hong Son, Mai Thai Linh, Most

Venerable Thich Huyen Quang, Most Venerable Thich Quang Do,

Father Nguyen Van Ly, Pastor Nguyen Lap Ma, Father Phan Van

Loi, numerous leaders of the Hoa Hao Buddhist Church and of

independent Protestant churches, and an undetermined number

of members of the Montagnard ethnic minority groups who

participated in peaceful demonstrations in the Central

Highlands of Viet Nam during February 2001.

(4) The Government of Viet Nam systematically deprives its

citizens of the fundamental right or organized religious

activities outside the state's control. Although some freedom

of worship is permitted, believers are forbidden to

participate in religious activities except under

circumstances rigidly defined and controlled by the

Government:

(A)(i) In April, 1999 the Government issued a Decree

Concerning Religious Activities, which declared in pertinent

part that ``[a]ll activities using religious belief in order

to oppose the State of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, to

prevent the believers from carrying out civic

responsibilities, to sabotage the union of all the people,

and against the health culture of our nation, as well as

superstitious activities, will be punished in conformity with

the law''.

(ii) All public religious activities must be approved by

the Government in advance. The United States Commission on

International Religious Freedom in October 2002 recommended

that Viet Nam be classified as a country of particular

concern. At its Seventh Plenum in January 2003, the Communist

Party's Central Committee issued a resolution calling for the

establishment of cells of Communist Party members within each

of Vietnam's 6 approved religions in order to foil ``hostile

forces''.

(B)(i) The Unified Buddhist Church of Viet Nam (UBCV), the

largest religious denomination in the country, has been

declared illegal by the Government, and over the last 27

years its clergy have often been imprisoned and subjected to

other forms of persecution. The Patriarch of the Unified

Buddhist Church, 85-year-old Most Venerable Thich Huyen

Quang, has been detained for 25 years in a ruined temple in

an isolated area of central Viet Nam.

(ii) Most Venerable Thich Quang Do, the Executive President

of the Unified Buddhist Church, has also been in various

forms of detention since 1977, and was recently rearrested

and placed under house arrest after he had proposed to bring

Most Venerable Thich Huyen Quang to Saigon for medical

treatment.

(iii) Many other leading Buddhist figures, including Thich

Hai Tang, Thich Khong Tanh, Thich Thai Hoa, Thich Tue Si,

Thich Quang Hue, Thich Tam An, Thich Nguyen Ly, Thich Thanh

Huyen, Thich Thong Dat, Thich Chi Mau, Thich Chi Thang, Thich

Chon Niem, Thich Thanh Quang are under tight surveillance.

Several members of the UBCV have fled to Cambodia

(C)(i) The Hao Hoa Buddhist Church was also declared to be

illegal until 1999, when the Government established an

organization which purports to govern the Hao Hoa. According

to the United States Commission on International Religious

Freedom, ``[t]his organization is made up almost entirely of

Communist Party members and apparently is not recognized as

legitimate by the vast majority of Hao Hoas . . .

[n]evertheless, [this government-sponsored organization] has

sought to control all Hao Hoa religious activity,

particularly at the Hao Hoa village, which is the center of

Hao Hoa religious life''.

(ii)(I) Hao Hoa believers who do not recognize the

legitimacy of the government organization are denied the

right to visit the Hao Hoa village, to conduct traditional

religious celebrations, or to display Hao Hoa symbols. Many

have been arrested and subjected to administrative detention,

and several Hao Hoa have been sentenced to prison terms for

protesting these denials of religious freedom.

(II) The Government interferes with Hao Hoa efforts to

conduct charitable works, and prohibits public celebration to

commemorate the founder's disappearance as well as the

distribution of the founder's teachings. The Government

controls greatly the leadership selection process of the

Cao Dais, another indigenous Vietnamese religion.

(III) At least the following Hao Hoa believers are known to

be in prison or house detention: Ha Hai, Tran Van Be Cao,

Tran Nguyen Huon, Phan Thi Tiem, Le Quang Liem, Nguyen Van

Dien, Le Minh Triet, and Vo Van Thanh Liem.

(D)(i) Independent Protestants, most of whom are members of

ethnic minority groups, are subjected to particularly harsh

treatment by the Government of Viet Nam. According to the

United States Commission on International Religious Freedom,

such treatment includes ``police raids on homes and house

churches, detention, imprisonment, confiscation of religious

and personal property, physical and psychological abuse, and

fines for engaging in unapproved religious activities (such

as collective worship, public religious expression and

distribution of religious literature, and performing

baptisms, marriages, or funeral services) . . . [i]n

addition, it is reported that ethnic Hmong Protestants have

been forced by local officials to agree to abandon their

faith''.

(ii)(I) According to human rights activists in Viet Nam, 2

secret central plans--Plan 184A and 184B--issued in 1999 by

the Communist Party to combat Protestant believers were fully

implemented throughout the country, and led to a crackdown on

the Protestant movement, especially in the Central and

Northern Highland areas.

(II) An estimated 14,000 Christians fled from the North to

the Central Highlands in the past 5 years. According to the

Southern Evangelical Church of Viet Nam, the Government of

Viet Nam forcibly closed 354 of the 412 churches in Dak Lak

province, 56 pastors from the Central Highlands have

disappeared, and at least 43 evangelical Montagnards have

been sentenced to prison. Freedom House has reported on the

beating death of Hmong Christian Mua Bua Senh by police

authorities.

(E)(i) Other religious organizations, such as the Catholic

Church, are formally recognized by the Government but are

subjected to pervasive regulation which violates the right to

freedom of religion. For instance, the Catholic Church is

forbidden to appoint its own bishops without Government

consent, which is frequently denied, to accept seminarians

without specific official permission, and to profess Catholic

doctrines which are inconsistent with Government policy.

Government restrictions on the seminary process have caused a

severe shortage of priests.

(ii) A Catholic priest, Father Nguyen Van Ly, was arrested

in March 2001 and remains in detention after submitting

written testimony to the United States Commission on

International Religious Freedom. On October 19, 2001, he was

sentenced to a total of 20 years of imprisonment and house

arrest; the

trial in Hue took place closed to the public and without a

defense lawyer.

(iii) In October 2002, the Vietnamese Bishops Conference

took an unprecedented step when they protested to the

National Assembly about the persecutions endured by Catholic

ethnic minorities.

(F) The Government has also confiscated numerous churches,

temples, and other properties belonging to religious

organizations. The vast majority of these properties--even

those belonging to religious organizations formally

recognized by the Government--have never been returned.

(5)(A) Since 1975 the Government of Viet Nam has persecuted

veterans of the Army of the Republic of Viet Nam and other

Vietnamese who had opposed the Viet Cong insurgency and the

North Vietnamese invasion of South Viet Nam. Such persecution

typically included substantial terms in ``re-education

camps'', where detainees were often subjected to torture and

other forms of physical abuse, and in which many died.

(B) Re-education camp survivors and their families were

often forced into internal exile in ``New Economic Zones''.

Many of these former allies of the United States, as well as

members of their families, continue until the present day to

suffer various forms of harassment and discrimination,

including denial of basic social benefits and exclusion from

higher education and employment.

(6)(A) The Government of Viet Nam has been particularly

harsh in its treatment of members of the Montagnard ethnic

minority groups of the central Highlands of Viet Nam, who

were the first line in the defense of South Viet Nam against

invasion from the North and who fought courageously beside

members of the Special Forces of the United States, suffering

disproportionately heavy casualties, and saving the lives of

many of their American and Vietnamese comrades-in-arms.

(B) Since 1975 the Montagnard peoples have been singled out

for severe repression, in part because of their past

association with the United States and in part because their

strong commitment to their traditional way of life and to

their Christian religion is regarded as inconsistent with the

absolute loyalty and control demanded by the Communist

system. The Government employs a policy of assimilation and

oppression against the Montagnards, forcibly displacing them

from their ancestral lands to make way for North Vietnamese

settlers, coffee plantations, and logging operations.

(C) Between February and March 2001, several thousand

members of the mountain tribes Djarai, Bahnar, and Rhade from

the provinces of Pleiku, Gialai, and Daklak took part in a

series of peaceful demonstrations to demand the release of 2

Montagnard Christians, religious freedom and restoration of

their confiscated lands. The Government responded by closing

off the Central Highlands and sending in military forces,

tanks and helicopter gunships. Hundreds of demonstrators were

injured. Altogether, more than 200 people, among them 60

evangelical priests and tribal chieftains, were arrested.

Some regions of the Central Highlands remain closed to

journalists and foreign diplomats.

(D) Credible reports by refugees who have escaped to

Cambodia indicate that the Government has executed some

participants in the demonstrations and has subjected others

to imprisonment, torture, and other forms of physical abuse.

(E) The Government of Viet Nam has also taken steps to

prevent further Montagnards from escaping, and there are

credible reports that Vietnamese security forces in Cambodia

are offering bounties for the surrender of Montagnard asylum

seekers.

(F) According to Human Rights Watch, in December 2002 `[The

Government] arrested or detained dozens of highlanders and

banned Christmas church services in order to prevent minority

Christians from gathering. Six highlanders were detained

during the third week in December in Krong Ana and Cu Jut

districts, Dak Lak, during Christmas prayer services, while

another eight were taken into custody as they are attempting

to cross the border to Cambodia. Villagers throughout the

Central Highlands were warned they would face fines and even

imprisonment if they organized Christmas services. In many

areas authorities banned gatherings of four or more people'.

(7) The Government of Viet Nam has also persecuted members

of other ethnic minority groups, including the Khmer Kron

from the Mekong Delta, many of whom fought alongside United

States military personnel during the Viet Nam war and whose

Hinayana Buddhist religion is not among those recognized by

the Government.

(8) The Government of Viet Nam also engages in or condones

serious violations of the rights of workers. In August 1997,

the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) reported that

child labor exploitation is on the rise in Viet Nam with tens

of thousands of children under 15 years of age being subject

to such exploitation. The government's official labor export

program also has subject workers, many of whom are women, to

involuntary servitude, debt bondage, and other forms of

abuse, and the reaction of government officials to worker

complaints of such abuse has been to threaten the workers

with punishment if they do not desist in their complaints.

The government of Viet Nam has made some minor efforts to

improve this situation, but enforcement of child labor laws

remains weak, and the child exploitation still persists.

(9)(A) United States refugee resettlement programs for

Vietnamese nationals, including the Orderly Departure Program

(ODR), the Resettlement Opportunities for Returning

Vietnamese (ROVR) program, and resettlement of boat people

from refugee camps throughout Southeast Asia, were authorized

by law in order to rescue Vietnamese nationals who have

suffered persecution on account of their wartime associations

with the United States, as well as those who currently have a

well-founded fear of persecution on account of race,

religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a

particular social group.

(B) In general, these programs have served their purposes

well. However, many refugees who were eligible for these

programs were unfairly denied or excluded, in some cases by

vindictive or corrupt Communist officials who controlled

access to the programs, and in others by United States

personnel who imposed unduly restrictive interpretations of

program criteria. These unfairly excluded refugees include

some of those with the most compelling cases, including many

Montagnard combat veterans and their families.

(C) The Department of State has agreed to extend the

September 30, 1994, registration deadline for former United

States employees, ``re-reduction'', survivors, and surviving

spouses spouses of those who did not survive ``re-education''

camps to sign for United States refugee programs.

(D) The Department of State has agreed to resume the

Vietnamese In-Country Priority One Program in Viet Nam to

provide protection to victims of persecution on account of

race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership

in a particular social group who otherwise have no access to

the Orderly Departure Program.

(E) The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service in

the Department of Homeland Security has agreed to resume the

processing of former United States employees under the U11

program, which had been unilaterally suspended by the United

States Government.

(F) The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service has

agreed to review the applications of Americans, children of

America servicemen left behind in Viet Nam after the war

ended in April 1975, for resettlement to the United States

under the Amerasian Homecoming Act of 1988..

(10) The Government of Viet Name systematically jams

broadcasts by Radio Free Asia, and indepdent broadcast

service funded by the United States in orderly to provide

news and entertainment to the people of countries in Asia

whose government deny the right to freedom of expression and

of the press.

(11) In 1995 the Governments of the United States and Viet

Nam announced the ``normalization'' of diplomatic relations.

In 1998 then-President Clinton waived the application of

section 402 of the Trade Act of 1974 (commonly) known as the

``Jackson-Vanik Amendments'', which restircts economic

assistance to countries with non-market economies whose

government also restrict freedom of emigration. In 1999 the

Governments of the United States and Viet Nam announced ``an

agreement in principle,'' on a bilateral trade agreement.

This agreement was signed in 2000 and came into effect on

December 10, 2001.

(12) The Congress and the American People are united in

their determination that the extension or expansion of trade

relations with a country whose Government engaged in serious

and systematic violations of fundamental human rights must be

considered as a statement of approval or complacency about

such practices. The promotion of freedom and democracy around

the world--and particularly for people who have suffered in

large part because of their past association with the United

States and because they share our values--is and must

continue to be a central objective of United States foreign

policy.

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. While the stringent nature of the Rules governing the amendment process for this bill preclude my input by way of amendment, I submit that the issue of famine in Ethiopia is worthy of inclusion with the report language on this bill.

Unfortunately, even as we speak now, some 11-14 million people will go hungry in the coming months.

Effect of Famine on the Agriculture Industry

Severe drought conditions destroyed over 15 percent of the October- November 2002 harvest in Ethiopia. The resultant failure of root vegetables and green crops to grow has caused families that depend on subsistence farming to not only lack food, but also seeds for replanting next year. This situation makes the availability of genetically modified organism (GMO) seeds dangerously attractive to the hungry, inuring them to the host of side affects and ailments that have yet to be confirmed or denied by the Food and Drug Administration.

As a result of the poor arability of the land and other adverse conditions, not only are the people's crops suffering, but their livestock as well. With the mortality rate steadily rising, those remaining are experiencing a lowered body weight, which results in reduced traction, power and milk production, which again will lead to insecure food sources. Unless veterinary services improve, the death toll will continue to increase as the livestock's immune system grows weaker resulting from poor conditions and common diseases.

The combined effect of plummeting livestock prices and skyrocketing cereal prices, the poorer households face an even worse predicament in obtaining food. Their wage rate is reported to be 3 times lower in the current year than in the same period last year.

According to recent studies, there were 35,000 people in Ziquala, 34,920 people in Ambassel, 16,300 in Wadla, 17,455 in Kewet and 156,200 in the three words of South Gondar who were in need of external assistance through the upcoming months.

Ethiopian Economy in the Face of Famine

Ethiopia's poverty-stricken economy is based on agriculture, which accounts for half of GDP, 85% of exports, and 80% of total employment. The agricultural sector suffers from frequent drought and poor cultivation practices, and as many as 4.6 million people need food assistance annually. Coffee is critical to the Ethiopian economy with exports of some $260 million in 2000. Other important exports include live animals, hides, and gold.

The war with Eritrea in 1999-2000 and recurrent drought have buffeted the economy, in particular coffee production. In November 2001, Ethiopia qualified for debt relief from the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative. Under Ethiopia's land tenure system, the government owns all land and provides long-term leases to the tenants; the system continues to hamper growth in the industrial sector as entrepreneurs are unable to use land as collateral for loans. Despite this limitation, strong growth is expected to continue in the near term as good rainfall, the cessation of hostilities, and renewed foreign aid and debt relief push the economy forward.

short-term consequences of inaction or lack of timely remedial measures

An estimated six children die of drought-related conditions daily in Ethiopia, according to one estimate. Many of them have collapsed from disease or dehydration after walking for days with their families in search of nourishment. Thousands are fleeing remote villages where wells have dried up and agencies have yet to establish food stations.

who is at risk?

The U.N. warns that as many as 16 million people are at risk of starvation in 10 countries across East and central Africa, from Burundi to Eritrea on the Red Sea. The crisis is most severe in Ethiopia's perpetually dry Ogaden region, where wells have gone dry, crops have withered and the skeletons of cattle and sheep lay in barren fields. Camels in Ogaden have stopped lactating, leaving children without milk, a staple in the impoverished nation.

Some Ethiopians are fortunate enough to have access to feeding centers, which supply rehydration treatments and high protein biscuits. Relief agencies are struggling to set up more centers in remote regions before residents migrate elsewhere for food. Sometimes, lack of clean drinking water, which is needed to mix the children's food into gruel, makes it impossible for centers to be stationed in some areas.

a rich history of fighting hunger in the 18th congressional district

The late Honorable Mickey Leland established the House Select Committee on Hunger in 1984 and served as its chairman until his tragic death in 1989. The Select Committee was instrumental in drawing attention to the problem of hunger internationally and within the United States. On a humanitarian mission to Africa, Mickey experienced the death of a starving child in his arms. This eye-opening experience led him to redouble his efforts to fight hunger, resulting in 350,000 tons of food to aid famine victims in Ethiopia. Congressman Leland lost his life in Ethiopia trying to save more lives. I would like to work with this committee to include report language in this bill that encourages a greater emphasis on the ongoing famine and a solution to this deadly problem.

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you an issue, the relevance of which, will potentially merit inclusion into the House Reports on H.R. 1950, the State Department Authorization bill. The issue concerns the initiative of achieving international peace by way of the leadership of women.

women leaders as the universal Hub in the peace process

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I propose that women play any and all roles that will give them an opportunity to use their leadership skills in the peace process. Therefore, this request would include diplomatic as well as formal organizational leadership roles. I support the International Leadership Act of 2003, co-authored by you and Representative David Dreier, Chairman of the House Committee on Rules and included in the bill provisions.

women's role in the international leadership act of 2003

I see women leading and adding important skills to the ``Democracy Caucus'' proposed in the Act. The Democracy Caucus would work as a very timely vehicle for women to lead the way, especially in the area of rebuilding democratic government in post-war Iraq. With the help of the United Nations, we can prevent rogue regimes from assuming dangerous amounts of influence and taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of rebuilding nations such as Iraq and even Liberia. I would posit that fashioning the proposed diplomacy program under the Act to give women particular attention will greatly enhance the multilateral character of our ambassador fleet.

The Oslo Summit: Women's Partnership for Peace

Mr. Chairman, I took advantage of a unique experience when I served as an Honorary Chair for the Women's Partnership for Peace in the Middle East in Oslo, Norway in June of this year. I shared a panel with an unprecedented group of more than 70 women from Israel, Palestine, the United States, Europe and Asia who met in Oslo, Norway at the Nobel Peace Institute to launch the Women's Partnership for Peace in the Middle East.

The objective of the Oslo Summit was to set clear goals and devise a plan of action for achieving a greater role for women in peace negotiations in the region and in the overall effort to achieve peace, a movement largely devoid of women's perspectives and participations. I would like to see women play a more pronounced role not only in the establishment of business opportunity but also in the peace process, and this kind of forum offers a platform that is both transnational as well as international. In training our diplomats to act as more efficient international ``joints,'' it is critical that we deputize our strong women leaders.

her excellency dr. inonge mbikusita-lewanika: an icon of peace

As a final remark and by way of example, I would like to highlight the experience and achievement of Her Excellency Dr. Inonge Mbikusita- Lewanika, Ambassador to Zambia. This woman, whom I had the honor and pleasure of presenting the Freedom Magazine Award for Human Rights Leadership on July 9, 2003 is an example of the impact a woman can have on international peace negotiations and efforts.

If I may chronicle a few of her accomplishments, she was appointed as a special envoy to the African Union and allowed to advance the movement of women in her nation in the effort for peace. Her various posts have decorated her career with great international breadth and astute conflict-resolution skill: UNICEF Regional Advisor for Families and Children in 19 countries; as stated above, a Peace Envoy convening numerous peace missions such as the Organization for African Unity; and the United Nations-sponsored peace mission to Rwanda amidst the period of human rights atrocity and genocide. In fact, Her Excellency Lewanika is one of the few prominent African women to serve in United Nations missions for war-torn African nations. Moreover, she understands the importance and the benefits of structuring and maintaining an organized democratic government and an effective electoral process. These initiatives are evidenced by her audacious efforts to lead a 1,000- member observe team from the Electoral Institute of Southern Africa to Zimbabwe's parliamentary elections and to spearhead the nine-member resignation from the Ruling Party in Zambia due to findings of corruption and lack of vision in 1993, whereupon she was elected Founding President of the Opposition National Party. Furthermore, her positions of leadership in organizations such as the Forum for Parliamentarians for Peace in Eastern and Southern Africa; the African Women Committee for Peace and Development; the Women Development Association; and the Federation of African Women's Peace Networks, heading the first delegation of women for peace to Ethiopia and Eritrea during the bloody and tumultuous border war Zambia's Opposition Party, Agenda for Zambia as President, exemplifies her tenacity and willingness to commit the time and effort that is required to follow through on organization mission statements rather than spewing forth rhetoric and flowery speeches absent any real action.

For the reasons stated above, I would hope that these concerns regarding women involved in international peace efforts can be included in report language during conference.

Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I speak to you today regarding a pressing matter that deserves attention as we balance out the debate on H.R. 1950. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you an issue, the relevance of which, will potentially merit inclusion into the House Reports on H.R. 1950, the State Department Authorization bill. The issue concerns a nation that was founded during the nineteenth century by freed American slaves. Once a nation founded on the premises of freedom and opportunity, the Liberia of today is wrought with political upheaval and social unrest.

Within the last twenty years, Liberia has been the site of intense devastation and profound loss due to almost two decades of civil war. The latest war has lasted for approximately three years and has caused immense disruption to the social and political fabric of the region.

The health infrastructure in Liberia has crumbled, schools have become refugee camps, and the people have taken the law into their own hands. Nearly half of the Liberian population has been forced to flee to neighboring countries or to internationally assisted camps in Liberia. Large numbers of innocent, young children are being made into

child soldiers. Those children that are fortunate enough to escape the life of forced military service are often left with little to no options aside from living on the streets. This conflict has brought about political destablization on a mass scale, increased economic disparity, and what can only be described as societal chaos. And although a ceasefire was recently agreed upon, fighting and civil disobedience within the country has yet to subside.

Charles Taylor has exacerbated the civil war in Liberia since 1989 when he led the armed military faction that initiated a seven-year civil war in Monrovia. Of the emerging military factions in Liberia during this unsettling time, the group led by Charles Taylor was arguably the most dangerous and recalcitrant. An attempted peace process in mid-1996 resulted in the unexpected election of Charles Taylor as president. Although Liberia appeared to have entered into a time of normalcy, the killing and harassment of notable opposition leaders and the censure of Liberia's print and radio media raised doubts among many observers and prompted immediate concern from the U.S. as well as the rest of the international community. In 1999, President Taylor was charged with aiding the Revolutionary Front (RUF) rebels fighting the Sierra Leonean government. The U.S. has subsequently pursued unilateral policies that directly target the Taylor government.

The U.S. has had a long historical relationship with Liberia dating back to its original founding. Views diverge on whether the U.S. should provide Liberia with any assistance and if so what type of how much. The extensive historical involvement between U.S. and Liberia obligates, in my opinion, our government to take special responsibility to answer Liberia's humanitarian and developmental needs, promote an effective democracy, and work diligently to stop human rights abuses. Liberia has served as an important ally for the U.S. particularly during the Cold War era; it is in recognition of this long-standing relationship that the U.S. should serve as a vigilant presence in the efforts to bring calm and civility to this war-ravaged country.

Of course this is not the first time that U.S. presence has been requested to aid in the restoration of civility in a nation. Our involvement with conflicts and civil strife in Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo are a few of the more recent examples of successful humanitarian interventions. We were certainly more than willing to involve ourselves in Iraq under the auspices of terrorism and global peace; if peace be our aim, then we should have no qualms about coming to the aid of Liberian citizens. The question we should ask is why there is any hesitation to become involved with Liberia when there are well- established historical ties to this country. It is vital that the U.S. send in U.S. peacekeeping and humanitarian aid to support the Economic Community of West African States.

We know that Charles Taylor needs to go. He has been negating the peace process for years and it is therefore high time that he make his exit, once and for all.

The rhetoric put forth by those on the other side of the table, on the surface, speak to the dangers and long-term global implications of external intervention. However, we are quite selective about the dangers we are willing to face and the implications we are willing to make in the name of peace. What determines this difference? I think that those on the other side simply view Liberia as a region of non- strategic importance for U.S. foreign policy interests. This type of biased selectivity is unproductive and ineffective in the global community in which we live.

A consistent supply of humanitarian aid in the form of shelter, food, water, and medical care should be supplied to the region as well. In essence, we must do all we can to ensure that peace and stability return to Liberia once and for all. I hope to monitor the debate on this need and would hope that report language could be included in the report of the bill on helping Liberia now!

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, this is a tempting amendment to the bill, but more mature thought says no, it is not all that good of an idea. The fact is we still need the U.N. and its agencies to promote peacekeeping efforts in some parts of the world, to assist in the global anti-terrorist campaign to help rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, to promote nuclear non- proliferation by rogue states such as Iran and North Korea, and help implement our legislation designed to fight against HIV/AIDS.

Without the World Food Program, there would be more starvation and suffering in the world. Without the Food and Agricultural Organization, there would be scant support for global food standards. And without the International Civil Aviation Organization, there would be no effective management of civilian airplane traffic around the world.

Finally, to the extent that we decide to commit any U.S. troops as part of a regional West African peacekeeping force in Liberia, we certainly should not be cutting off funding for U.N. peacekeeping when we will need those same peacekeepers to relieve our troops, providing us with an exit strategy, safeguarding our interests.

With great respect, I urge the defeat of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona by way of Arizona does raise an important issue of how our dues to the U.N. regular budget are calculated. I would be glad to hold follow-up briefings and a hearing in the committee on our role at the U.N. and how our membership should promote our national interests and how our current assessment should reflect a fair share of all the other member states of the U.N.

There are, however, serious problems with the way this amendment is written insofar as it unilaterally alters our existing financial obligations to the United Nations. It will reduce our assessment from the current 22 percent to the level of 6.5 percent, thereby generating close to $250 million in new arrearages to the U.N. It would reduce our share of the funding of the regular budget of the U.N. far below the level currently being paid by Japan and Germany and would give those countries every reason to reduce their contributions accordingly.

The amendment mistakenly makes the assumption that the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council are assessed their dues on the basis of their inclusion in this body. The assessments are made instead on the basis of a member state's share of the world gross domestic product. In the case of the U.S., however, our share should actually be well over 22 percent.

In short, the amendment would have the same practical effect as that of the gentleman from Texas' (Mr. Paul) amendment, undercutting any role we would have in the U.N. and eventually leading to our withdrawal from the world body. If my colleagues voted against the Paul amendment, they should oppose this amendment as well.

In short, it takes a unilateral approach which could potentially harm U.S. interests and objectives around the world. Our contributions to the U.N. regular budget and to all other U.N. programs and agencies are agreed to by mutual consent of all U.N. members. If the U.S. were to unilaterally cut its assessment, we would start building arrears to the U.N. again just after completing a 3-year arrearage repayment effort under the Helms-Biden legislation where we obtained substantial management and administrative reforms in return for the payment of our back dues.

Adoption of this amendment would undercut those ongoing reform efforts, and I urge it be defeated.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I might just say that the gentleman is certainly making common sense, and the problem is we just cannot do it unilaterally. It might be wise for us to constantly review our dues and payments to the U.N., but there is a process that is not unilateral in getting them changed.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield such time as I have remaining to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. Chairman, may I claim time in opposition because I am reluctantly opposed to the gentlewoman's amendment?

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the learned chairman of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

If there is no export license requirement, it is difficult if not impossible to prevent information from being retransferred to a third country. This is important since our European allies do not always have the same policies as we do in satellite cooperation with China and other countries. The practical effect would be to deregulate much information about satellites and satellite technology. Given the importance of space technology to our national security, I am persuaded that such a drastic step should be approached with an abundance of precaution and entertained, if at all, only after detailed analysis.

In sum, if this amendment were written to provide the President with discretion to not require licensing, that would be one thing. But this amendment prohibits the President from controlling information about satellites. I think that is a reach too far, and I respectfully, if painfully, suggest the gentlewoman's amendment be defeated.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I have some reservations about this amendment. This points out a serious problem which is actually ongoing with not just India but some other countries as well. However, I am willing to accept this amendment and will do so with pleasure.

Mr. Chairman, I agree that foreign investment in countries of the former Soviet Union, such as Moldova, can carry significant risks for Americans and others. If the governments of these countries wish to enhance their economic prospects by encouraging foreign investment, then ensuring the security of those investments and honoring contractual agreements must be a top priority. I urge the government of Moldova to improve the transparency of its actions regarding foreign investment and to further develop the rule of law in this and other areas.

Mr. Chairman, by working together, I believe we will be able to resolve this matter in a manner that is satisfactory to all parties concerned.

Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 2 of House Resolution 316, I offer amendments en bloc consisting of the following amendments printed in House Report 108-206: amendments numbered 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40 and 42.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that Crane amendment No. 25, Burton of Indiana amendment No. 18 and Dreier amendment No. 38 be modified in the form I have caused to be placed at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).

(Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, increasingly, foreign governments have been lobbying localities in the United States to accept their consular cards as valid identification. At least two countries now issue consular cards in the U.S. for these purposes and many others are planning to do so. No standards govern those cards, and there is little information on which localities can rely in deciding whether to accept a country's consular card. All this amendment does is clarify the Secretary of State's power to ensure that issuance of these cards is rational and safe.

By authorizing the Secretary of State to regulate these cards and setting requirements that countries must meet in issuing the cards, this amendment will allow localities to make informed decisions on whether to accept such documents. Regulation of the cards will also protect the American people from the risks that unregulated and unreliable documents pose. Those risks were underscored recently by the FBI, which determined that because of their vulnerability to fraud and forgery, these cards pose criminal threats as well as a potential terrorist threat. The requirements in this amendment will address those threats by deterring fraud and improving the reliability of consular identification cards.

The amendment also provides an enforcement mechanism that empowers the Secretary of State to regulate consulates' compliance with these requirements. It is appropriate to vest this responsibility in the State Department. Not only does its Office of Foreign Missions currently regulate the activities of foreign consulates in the U.S. but the Department will also bring to this role its expertise in evaluating foreign documents. This amendment is needed to allow the State Department necessary authority to regulate foreign consulates in a changing environment. For this reason, I urge passage of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I just would like to respond to my friend from New Jersey who every time someone offers an amendment or a bill trying to get a handle on illegal immigration, known as undocumented, where we have God knows how many people in this country living in substandard style because of the illegality of their presence, and it could be in the millions, it does not mean there is some antipathy toward a racial group or an ethnic group at all. It is just a feeble attempt to get a handle on the borders of our country and who is here and who is not.

The problem is not getting better. It is getting worse. But trying to do something about it in good faith does not manifest the hostility at all. We are all immigrants sooner or later or back far enough, but I really resent the conclusion the gentleman draws that all Republicans do not like people of different ethnicity. I would say just the opposite.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say no card is better than a misleading card.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee for yielding me time.

I rise, Mr. Chairman, in the strongest possible opposition to the Paul amendment which would cause great harm to our national interests. Mr. Chairman, I do not look upon the United Nations through rose- colored spectacles. It is obvious that for every criticism my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), has of the United Nations, I could probably cite a half dozen. But the fact remains that many of the activities of the United Nations are clearly in the U.S. national interest.

The International Atomic Agency monitors and exposes countries such as North Korea and Iran attempting to develop nuclear weapons. The World Health Organization works to prevent infectious diseases throughout the world, and it was critical recently in putting a stop to the spread of SARS. UNESCO, which the President wisely decided to rejoin, will provide us an opportunity to make our voice heard in the educational, cultural and scientific field of the international organization. UNICEF, the United Nations International Children's Fund, is providing invaluable assistance across the globe to millions of children in desperate need; and the U.N. itself, more often than not, is helpful in attaining our own foreign policy objectives.

The absurdity of the United States, the one remaining superpower, the most powerful civilizing force on the face of this planet in the 21st century, withdrawing from the United Nations is nothing short of absurd; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject overwhelmingly this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the distinguished chairman of our committee for yielding me the time, and I want to identify my views with his and just add a few footnotes.

The United Nations was founded at the end of the Second World War when the United States was economically not only a superpower but had a vastly disproportionate share of global gross domestic product. At that time, our contribution to the U.N. was 40 percent. It is now 22 percent; and I think a legitimate case can be made for multilaterally, through negotiation, adjusting our contributions to the U.N. as gross domestic products of the various countries change. But to take unilateral action at this stage, when the United Nations is so badly needed, despite all of its flaws, would be a singularly ill-advised move; and I strongly urge all of my colleagues to reject this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me this time, and I rise in opposition to this amendment loosening satellite export controls.

I am profoundly concerned, Mr. Chairman, that the language of the amendment would result in all satellite marketing information being exempted from any licensing requirement at all. Even if unclassified, some of the information transferred might well be sensitive. It is also possible that companies, without the government review of a license requirement, may unintentionally transfer more information than they should under the pressure of making a sale. The Departments of State and Defense would have no idea whatsoever what information is actually being transferred.

The Congress needs more time and information to consider the full and serious ramifications of this change in satellite licensing regime in order to ensure that our national security is not compromised. I would urge the sponsors of this amendment, for whom I have a great deal of respect, to include at a future time a provision making clear that companies must first obtain a license to transfer marketing information. Short of that, I reluctantly oppose the amendment and ask all of my colleagues to vote against it.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. I strongly support his amendment.

Mr. Chairman, it is outrageous that American businesses entering in good faith into commercial transactions in various countries should be subjected to provincial governmental abuse. This is not the government of India which is refusing to meet its obligation but a constituent state of India, Tamil Nadu.

I think the gentleman is bringing an important matter before us, and I urge all of my colleagues to support him.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in strong support of the Hyde en bloc amendments. This measure includes a number of critical amendments that were ruled in order by the Committee on Rules. They include initiatives in support of U.S. companies and U.S. workers obtaining procurement contracts from our foreign policy agencies, improvements in our visa processing system, tools to fight international child abduction, an important measure encouraging a greater role for the United Nations and for NATO in maintaining peace in Iraq, support for the women of Afghanistan, and an important plan to compel the agencies that use our diplomatic facilities to share the costs of building and protecting them.

A number of our colleagues contributed to this important package, and I would like to recognize them. I commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Maloney) for their important work; and I urge all of my colleagues to support the Hyde en bloc amendments.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).

Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).

(Mr. MENENDEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Rangel-Lee amendment. I think it is a very constructive contribution to our global fight against AIDS, and I urge all of our colleagues to do so.

Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) for introducing this important amendment.

The Iranian people continue to suffer under a theocratic, terror- supporting dictatorship. Those courageous enough to call for democratic change are regularly met by the regimes-supported security forces and vigilante groups. Just last month the Iranian government acknowledged they arrested some 4,000 peaceful demonstrators. What was their crime? They wanted freedom.

This amendment affirms that the view of this body is that Iranians deserve real freedom, that they should not suffer because of their religious or political beliefs or because of their gender. The Sherman amendment supports Iranians' right to choose their own system of government, rather than having to endure the theocracy that has been forced upon them.

Oppression in Iran is a humanitarian issue, but it is not only that. The existence of a dictatorial Iranian regime directly affects the security of the United States which now faces an enemy with a rigid ideology which it backs through an unlimited use of terrorism, and it may soon have nuclear weapons.

Freedom in Iran is a nonpartisan issue. I strongly support this amendment and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in voting in favor of it.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the gentlewoman's amendment. It is sorely needed. I could not think of a more noble project than to assist Buddhist countries with huge debts with debt relief. This is a measure that deserves bipartisan support. I ask all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for an opportunity to talk about what has happened to manufacturing in our country and to thank the gentleman for including this amendment in the en bloc amendments.

In the latest report put out by the National Association for Manufacturing, the executive summary ends with this startling statement. ``If the U.S. manufacturing base continues to shrink at its present rate and its critical mass is lost, the manufacturing innovation process will shift to other global centers. Once that happens, a decline in U.S. living standards in the future is virtually assured.''

What this amendment does, it requires the State Department to increase the content of the articles, materials and supplies for construction, alteration or repair, to increase it from the 50 percent threshold to 65 percent. It is a modest amendment, but it takes the acquisitions that our government has and uses them to level the playing field so as to assure contracts to help out our precious manufacturing base.

We have lost nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs in the past 2 and a half years. Fifty-four thousand manufacturing jobs are lost every month, and that has been continuous for the past 34 months.

So we come to the United States Congress and the House of Representatives and we say something has to be done to stop the destruction of manufacturing in this country. This amendment helps out because it increases the content, which assures more manufacturing jobs for the manufacturers of America.

Securing America's Future: The Case for a Strong Manufacturing Base

U.S. manufacturing is the heart of a significant process

that generates economic growth and has produced the highest

living standards in history. But today this complex process

faces serious domestic and international challenges which, if

not overcome, will lead to reduced economic growth and

ultimately a decline in living standards for future

generations of Americans.

Manufacturing's innovation process is the key to past,

present and future prosperity and higher living standards.

The intricate process starts with an idea for a new product

or process, prompting investments in research and

development. R&D successes lead to investments in capital

equipment and workers, and to ``spillovers'' that benefit

manufacturing and other economic sectors. This process not

only generates new products and processes, but also leads to

well-paying jobs, increased productivity, and competitive

pricing. Yet while this process produces wealth and higher

living standards, most of it is hidden from view and poorly

understood.

Manufacturing's innovation process provides enormous

benefits for the entire U.S. economy:

Grows the Economy--Manufacturing growth spawns more

additional economic activities and jobs than any other

economic sector. Every $1 of final demand for manufactured

goods generates an additional $0.67 in other manufactured

products and $0.76 in products and services from

nonmanufacturing sectors.

Invents the Future--Manufacturers are responsible for

almost two-thirds of all private sector R&D--$127 billion in

2002. Spillovers from this R&D benefit other manufacturing

and nonmanufacturing firms. R&D spillovers are enhanced by

geographic proximity.

Generates Productivity Increases--Manufacturing

productivity gains are historically higher than those of any

other economic sector--over the past two decades,

manufacturing averaged twice the annual productivity gains of

the rest of the private sector. These gains enable Americans

to do more with less, increase our ability to compete, and

facilitates higher wages for all employees.

Provides More Rewarding Employment--Manufacturing salaries

and benefits average $54,000, higher than the average for the

total private sector. Two factors in particular attract

workers to manufacturing: higher pay and benefits, and

opportunities for advanced education and training.

Pays the Taxes--Manufacturing has been an important

contributor to regional economic growth and tax receipts at

all levels of government. During the 1990s, manufacturing

corporations paid 30-34 percent of all corporate taxes

collected by state and local governments, Social Security and

payroll taxes, excise taxes, import and tariff duties,

environmental taxes and license taxes.

Meanwhile, other nations, recognizing that a strong

manufacturing base is the proven path to a world-class

economy, have been learning from the American example and are

forging their own innovation processes to compete with ours.

America's manufacturing innovation process requires a

critical mass to generate wealth and higher standards of

living. If the U.S. manufacturing base continues to diminish

at its present rate that process may deteriorate beyond

repair and with it the seedbed

of our industrial strength and competitive edge.

The most serious challenges to the long-term viability of

the U.S. manufacturing base and the innovation process that

underlie it are:

Loss of Jobs--U.S. manufacturers historically lead the way

in an economic expansion, but are still struggling to recover

from the recent recession. Since July 2000, manufacturing has

lost 2.3 million jobs, many of which have been outsourced or

relocated overseas. Manufacturing output has shown no growth

since December 2001--the official end of the recession--in

the weakest manufacturing recovery since 1919.

Loss of Export Potential--Manufacturing exports as a share

of GDP have contracted since 1997, reflecting the strong

dollar overseas, the impact of the recession on our trading

partners, the terrorist attacks in the United States in

September 2001, and increased global competition. The U.S.

trade deficit has ballooned to historic highs--reflecting an

increase in purchases of foreign-made goods, especially from

countries which do not freely float their currencies.

Investments are Going Elsewhere--U.S. manufacturing's share

of capital investment and R&D expenditures, once a dominant

feature of our nation's commitment to progress, is

diminishing. While U.S. manufacturers conduct two-thirds of

private R&D, their R&D spending between 2000 and 2002 grew at

only half the pace of the previous decade.

Needs More Skilled Workers--Despite the loss of 2.3 million

jobs, manufacturing is facing a potential shortfall of highly

qualified employees with specific educational backgrounds and

skills, especially those specific skills needed to produce

manufactured goods. If the skills and knowledge of the

American workforce do not improve it will be detrimental to

manufacturing's competitive edge and to the prospect for

economic growth.

Facing Dramatically Rising Costs--The cost of doing

business in the United States is rising dramatically, in

large measure because of significant costs related to

healthcare, litigation, and regulation. As a result, many

U.S. manufacturers shut down or move production overseas to

countries where they do not face, to the same extent, those

kinds of impediments to reducing productions.

U.S. manufacturing's innovation process leads to

investments in equipment and people, to productivity gains,

to beneficial spillovers, and to new and improved products

and processes. This intricate process generates economic

growth and higher living standards superior to any other

economic sector. But serious challenges threaten to undermine

the critical mass of manufacturing necessary to maintain a

dynamic innovation process. If the U.S. manufacturing base

continues to shrink at its present rate and the critical mass

is lost, the manufacturing innovation process will shift to

other global centers. Once that happens, a decline in U.S.

living standards in the future is virtually assured.