Nicaragua Property Dispute Settlement Act of 2003

Mr. Speaker, last week Colorado experienced a very heavy snowstorm--in fact, it was a blizzard in many areas. This was good news for our state, which has been suffering from a serious drought. However, it seriously interfered with travel. As a result, I was unable to be present for votes on several measures. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows:

On rollcall No. 65, H. Con. Res. 26--Condemning the punishment of execution by stoning as a gross violation of human rights--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 66, H.R. 868--Nicaragua Property Dispute Settlement Act of 2003--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 67, H. Res. 109--Urging passage of a resolution addressing human rights in North Korea at the 59th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and calling on the Government of North Korea to respect and protect the human rights of its citizens--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 68, H.R. 314--Mortgage Servicing Clarification Act (Royce Financial Services)--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 69, H.R. 417--Cibola Wildlife Refuge Boundary Correction--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 70, H.R. 699--To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a comprehensive study of the Rathdrum Prairie/Spokane Valley Aquifer, located in Idaho and Washington--I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 71, the Sherman amendment to H.R. 975 (bankruptcy bill), I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 72, the Nadler amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 975 (bankruptcy bill), I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 73, the Jackson-Lee motion to recommit H.R. 975 (bankruptcy bill), I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 74, passage of H.R. 975 (bankruptcy bill), I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 75, on approving the Journal, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 76, H.R. 1307--To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a special rule for members of the uniformed services in determining the exclusion of gain from the sale of a principal residence and to restore the tax exempt status of death gratuity payments to members of the uniformed services, and for other purposes-- I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 77, H. Res. 132--Expressing the sense of the House that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Newdow v. United States Congress is inconsistent with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the first amendment and should be overturned, and for other purposes--I would have voted ``present.''

I would have voted that way because I am not a lawyer and have not studied the relevant decisions of the Supreme court--and so I do not think it would be appropriate for me to say that the cited decision of the Court of Appeals is inconsistent with those decisions.

Last year, I voted in favor of a related (but not identical) resolution. However, as I said at that time, I did so not because I necessarily agreed that the Circuit Court's decision is ``inconsistent with the U.S. Supreme Court's First Amendment jurisprudence'' as that resolution said, but because I agreed that ``the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals should agree to rehear'' the matter, as that resolution also stated.

I am proud to recite the Pledge of Allegiance because I personally consider it as being neither a prayer nor a religious practice and so think its recitation is not a religious exercise but instead a verbal expression of support for our country. However, obviously not everyone shares my view. And, as I said last year, I am not prepared to conclude that the author of the Ninth Circuit decision--a long-serving judge originally appointed by President Nixon--was clearly wrong as a matter of law, even though as I understand it another appeals court, in a similar case, has ruled differently. So, I definitely think the issue needs to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

On rollcall No. 78, the Hill (Blue Dog) substitute to the budget resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 79, the Toomey (Republican Study Committee) substitute to the budget resolution, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 80, the Cummings (Black Caucus/Progressive Caucus substitute to the budget resolution, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 81, the Spratt (Democratic) substitute to the budget resolution, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall No. 82, on passage on H. Con. Res. 95 (the budget resolution), I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 83, passage of H. Con. Res. 104--expressing the support and appreciation of the Nation for the President and the members of the Armed forces who are participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom--I would have voted ``yes.''

I would have done so because although I have disagreed with the way the President has handled the diplomatic events leading up to war, it is now time for us all to support our brave men and women in uniform who are charged with carrying out this mission and to pray for their success and safe return home. We all hope for a swift resolution with minimal casualties--among our troops and Iraqis as well. And we must do more to protect ourselves at home. I am confident that the United States and our allies will win the war. That will not be the end, but the beginning of the more difficult task of securing the peace. Congress must commit to providing aid to rebuild Iraq and the Administration must work to repair relationships with our allies. We will need them and the rest of the international community in our corner to rebuild Iraq, bring stability to the Middle East, and win the war on terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, a constituent once asked if minor pieces of legislation that we consider on the suspension calendar actually matter, particularly those that concern foreign nations. My response was that it is important to remember, especially in this era of the Internet and instant communication and CNN, that what might appear to be trivial to us is seen quite differently elsewhere and can have significant long- lasting effects. This bill, for example.

While to some it may seem to be an obscure piece of legislation dealing with a tiny, impoverished nation, one that is not on the Security Council, and given the challenges that we face with the war against terrorism and imminent invasion of Iraq, a distressed economy, a health care crisis, it might even seem to be an afterthought. But it is not an afterthought for the people of Nicaragua, and it should not be an afterthought for the United States. In fact, this bill has the potential to be critically important for Nicaragua's future, for Central America's future and, ultimately, for our own future.

As the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger) indicated, Nicaragua, after Haiti, is the second poorest nation in the hemisphere. It was battered by years of war. It is a place where the magnitude of corruption by the political leadership has been enormous, especially recent ones. Now Nicaragua finally has a president in Enrique Bolanos, an honest man who genuinely wants to make a difference. This bill can help him and that fragile democracy that he presides over.

As the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger) have indicated, current U.S. law prevents us from providing certain kinds of foreign aid to countries that have seized the property of American citizens. Never mind that these seizures occurred under previous governments. Never mind that some of these claimants were not U.S. citizens at the time of the seizures, which I believe violates international law; but that is a debate for another day. This legislation changes that.

As the chairman of the subcommittee indicated, after a certain period of time, new claims will no longer prevent Nicaragua from receiving U.S. aid and will not prevent the United States Government from assisting our fellow citizens who seek and deserve justice, and it will not end the Government of Nicaragua's responsibility to settle these claims. But this bill will do much to nurture Nicaragua's efforts to develop its democracy; and it will encourage a new spirit of respect and cooperation between that impoverished nation and the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my friend, my colleague, my chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), for introducing this bill. It is just more evidence of his attention to this hemisphere and his love for its people. He and I do not always agree on how to deal with all of our neighbors, but we do agree that they deserve far more of our attention, and our respect. So I am grateful to him for inviting me to cosponsor this important piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that the passage of this legislation is followed quickly by an increased program of U.S. assistance to Nicaragua, particularly to develop its judicial system and strengthen its legislative body. While I have full confidence in President Bolanos, it is the development of strong democratic institutions that will allow democracy to prosper and flourish in Nicaragua.

Reports speak of a reconstruction program for Iraq in excess of $100 billion. For far too long we have failed to adequately engage in our own neighborhood. We cannot continue to ignore our neighbors in Central America, the Caribbean, and South America. To do so, we do so at our own risk.

Once upon a time, Nicaragua was front and center in our policy debates. That war that many in this Chamber spent enormous time and effort on this floor debating and discussing has faded from our memories, and Nicaragua has receded from the spotlight. However, this modest bill, in a rather nuanced and subtle way, will help Nicaragua move closer to the democracy its people so justly deserve and desire. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 868) to amend section 527 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 to require that certain claims for expropriation by the Government of Nicaragua meet certain requirements for purposes of the prohibition on foreign assistance to that government.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, section 527 of the ``Foreign Relations Authorization Act, fiscal years 1994 and 1995,'' sanctions or stops certain U.S. bilateral assistance and U.S. support for assistance from International Financial Institutions for a government of a country that has confiscated a U.S. citizen's property. Nicaragua sadly falls amongst these rules of section 527, but has received Presidential waivers of the sanctions every year since the legislation was enacted.

American citizens have had nearly 12 years to come forward to file property claims with the American embassy. This bill amends section 527 to afford American citizens a reasonable opportunity to file a claim with the American embassy in Managua.

Any American citizen who has not yet filed a property claim with the American embassy will have 120 days after the notice is published in the Federal Register to do so. Any claims already on file or that are filed within the 120-day period can continue to be considered by the State Department in making its annual determination as to whether to apply the waiver or the sanctions authorized under section 527.

This bill would not, however, prevent American citizens from filing property

claims after the 120-day period and seeking help from the American embassy in Managua to engage on their behalf with the Government of Nicaragua regarding their claim.

At the same time, the bill sets a date certain that the Nicaraguan government can look to as an end date for registering new property cases for the purpose of the prohibition on assistance currently in law. This will provide important encouragement for the government of President Enrique Bolanos, who is an ally of the United States. Nicaragua is one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere and continued American assistance to Nicaragua is vitally important.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Nicaragua has incurred $236 million in debt to pay these claims. The Bush administration supports the bill. I also want to thank my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), for cosponsoring this bill with me. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I first would like to applaud the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the Committee on International Relations, for expediting consideration of this very important bill in support of President Enrique Bolanos and his administration. I also want to acknowledge the two cosponsors of this bill, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), my good friend, who has been one of our leaders on all Western Hemisphere affairs.

Mr. Speaker, the world last year witnessed the constitutional and peaceful transfer of power in Nicaragua from one democratically elected president to another. The inauguration of President Bolanos thus represented the further consolidation of democracy in Nicaragua after many decades of authoritarian rule.

Since his inauguration, President Bolanos and his administration have struggled to reinvigorate the Nicaraguan economy, create jobs, reduce widespread poverty, and battle institutionalized corruption. Although the task is daunting, as Nicaragua remains to this day the second poorest country in the Western Hemisphere after despairingly devastated Haiti, it is not insurmountable with the help of allies like the United States.

H.R. 868 reflects our commitment to assisting Nicaragua in meeting its many challenges in a couple of ways. First, the Nicaragua Property Dispute Settlement Act enables us to bolster the efforts of the Nicaraguan administration to address the claims of U.S. citizens who have had property expropriated by previous Nicaraguan administrations. Equally importantly, our legislation signals our strong support for the new administration as it attempts to purge Nicaraguan institutions of cronyism and corruption.

As we consider H.R. 868, I am confident that President Bolanos is as resolved as we are to strengthen the ties between our two countries by working together on issues of common concern like voting patterns at the United Nations.

I encourage all of my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), my good friend and distinguished colleague.

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

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for rollcall vote Nos. 65, 66, and 67 due to my attendance at the funeral for former Rochester Mayor Thomas P. Ryan, Jr. and traffic jams caused by the standoff with Mr. Watson on the Mall in Washington, DC. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote Nos. 65, 66, and 67. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my statement appear in the permanent Record immediately following this vote.

H. Con. Res. 26, rollcall No. 65, ``aye.''

H.R. 868, rollcall No. 66, ``aye.''

H. Res. 109, rollcall No. 67, ``aye.''