Providing for an adjournment or recess of the two Houses.

Mr. Chairman, I regret that I cannot vote for this bill.

I am not opposed to the ostensible purpose of the bill--in fact, I share the view that the United Nations needs to be improved so it can better carry out its indispensable role.

The U.N. is a critically important body that has taken on many of the world's problems and solved them--problems such as poverty, disease, and international disputes. And the U.S. has benefited from U.N. actions. Just recently, the U.N. helped with elections in Afghanistan and Iraq and helped negotiate the withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon.

But it has serious problems, as exemplified by the oil-for-food scandal and offenses committed by U.N. peacekeeping forces.

So, I support U.N. reform--but I cannot support the approach the bill takes toward achieving that objective.

The bill would require the Secretary of State to push for reforms at the U.N. in the areas of budgeting, oversight and accountability, peacekeeping, and human rights. That is something that needs to be done. But if the Secretary of State cannot certify that the reforms have been achieved, starting in 2007, the Secretary would be required to withhold 50 percent of the U.S. assessed contributions to the U.N.'s regular budget. The assessed U.S. contributions are estimated at $362 million for 2005, and $439 million for 2006.

I think such a punitive and unilateral approach to reform will not work. I think its primary result would be to further isolate the United States while at the same time actually undermining ongoing efforts at reform and potentially jeopardizing the U.N.'s ability to focus on global threats and work toward greater global stability.

The substitute proposed by Representatives Lantos and Shays would have been a better approach, and I regret that it was not adopted.

As it stands, the bill is problematic on a number of fronts. First, it would mandate withholding of dues from programs that do not get moved from the U.N.'s assessed budget to a system of voluntary contribution, a goal unlikely to be achieved.

Also, it would require the United States to veto Security Council resolutions establishing any new U.N. peacekeeping missions--including involvement in a crisis like the one taking place in Darfur--until the peacekeeping reforms called for by the bill have been completed. This is like forbidding firemen to respond to a blaze because we are unhappy about the way the department is organized and financed. I cannot support that.

The bill would cut U.S. contributions to U.N. conferences and public information programs by 20 percent unless the overall budgets for these programs are cut by 20 percent, and if the 20 percent target is not met by 2008, the bill would mandate the withholding of 50 percent of U.S. contributions. It also would require that 50 percent of annual dues be withheld even if just one of 14 mandatory benchmarks were not met. These go beyond stern--they are petulant. Their predictable result is not reform, but failure.

In short, the bill as it stands would simultaneously demand reform and make it impossible to achieve.

The substitute offered by Representatives Lantos and Shays would have used carrots as well as sticks and would have given much greater flexibility to the Secretary of State.

The substitute included benchmarks very much like those in the base bill, but it gave flexibility to the Secretary of State to mandate the 50 percent cuts to our U.N. dues. Similarly, the substitute did not link the change from ``assessed'' to ``voluntary'' contributions to withholding a portion of our dues, and it would have allowed the Secretary of State to waive the peacekeeping reform requirements if it is determined that a new mission is in the U.S. national interest.

The substitute also included incentives by supporting an effort to pay our dues on time, an increased U.N. budget for the large number of new offices that will be needed to implement the reforms, a well structured buyout of unneeded U.N. personnel, and a contribution to the U.N. Democracy Fund.

The difference between the bill now before us and the Lantos-Shays substitute is that while the substitute was realistic in the way it set out a path toward reform, the majority's bill if fully implemented would effectively destroy the chances of achieving an effective and improved U.N.

Instead of adopting such an approach, the United States should engage the U.N. member countries in the process of reform and provide the U.N. with the resources necessary to accomplish reforms, rather than alienate the global community by threatening to withhold dues.

The Bush Administration itself is opposed to this legislation as it stands. I do not often agree with them, but I do in this instance and I therefore must vote against the bill.

Mr. Speaker, let me again applaud the International Relations Committee, Chairman Hyde and the ranking member for never stepping away from a very difficult challenge on the international arena.

Mr. Smith, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, let me again acknowledge your ongoing stand against the brutalization of peoples who are disenfranchised around this world and taking the responsibility that this moral Congress has, the one entity that is looked upon around the world for that extended helping hand.

I, too, traveled to Chad and to Sudan and looked at this whole complex situation. On the one hand, the Sudanese government in a certain sense having a mea culpa, ``not me, not I.'' The African Union being somewhat helpless to the extent that the charge they are given is only to watch and to see. And then in Chad, a country that is now being in essence not destroyed, but certainly charged and challenged with responsibilities that they cannot handle, thousands upon thousands of displaced persons, many of them women and children.

I visited in the heat of the spring and saw no water for the children to go to school, women being raped as they were leaving the camps to find survival, the Chad economy not being able to survive because of this enormous influx of new human beings. Yet, the Sudanese government continues, continues, to deny.

Might I say that in the course of this work, Mr. Lantos, you know that I have worked very hard to be, as many Members of Congress, a bridge builder between nations in the Mideast. But it is important for our friends, our Arab friends and our friends in China, to understand that they are participants, that they are doing all that is good; if they become implementers or affirmers of the genocide, that this excellent legislation that has the handprint of the outstanding gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Payne, who consistently has been on the battlefield, along with, of course, the excellent leadership of Leader Pelosi, who passionately went to the Sudan just a couple of months ago with members of the Congressional Black Caucus and others, who symbolize the concern of this Congress, that if they don't understand our allies, China being an emerging ally, certainly the work we are trying to do in the Mideast, that they are affirming this disaster.

Then they are not reading the tea leaves. So I come to this floor acknowledging the excellence of H.R. 3127, asking for the other body to immediately move forward. This is not a can-do piece of legislation. This is an emergency piece of legislation. And the President, who should have listened to Secretary Powell over a year ago, who declared after we pressed as Members of Congress, members of the congressional black caucus in particular, that genocide was going on, that it was crucial that the genocide that is going on, that Americans, Americans in every corner of this particular nation would be empathetic and sympathetic to say stop this massive killing. And when I say that, it is like horses going into your suburban neighborhoods, men and women or men on horses and attacking your homes and sending you out of your homes and burning your homes. That is what is going on in Sudan.

So let me join in the sanctions of this particular legislation, but let me say to the gentleman on this floor, I do think it is time to re- energize the movement that expressed to the Sudanese government by way of the embassy, to be very honest with you, that people be at the embassy to again express our disappointment with their lack of sensitivity. And then I must say that what I intend to do is to begin a movement of divestiture. I want to see the investment houses of America divest of any investment in the Sudan, and we will begin this as others have done in their States, and Texas needs to hear my call. Get your money out of Sudan. They are not listening. And the only way that they can be heard or we can be heard is the same way that apartheid was destroyed in South Africa, was to isolate them and to determine that they cannot any longer murder and pillage without impunity in this particular country.

I thank the distinguished gentleman, but I hope that we will be able to wage an effort, a bipartisan effort of divestiture, which ultimately brought South Africa to its recognition, that of separation of black and white and the brutality that occurred had to stop, and look at South Africa today. Sudan can be the kind of nation we all can be proud of.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

The United Nations, at its inception, was one of the most noble undertakings in modern human history. Its vision was of world governments working in concert to ameliorate, if not eradicate, world problems. This ideal, however, has over its more recent course become a body where some member nations appear more focused on institutional anti-Americanism than addressing the growing maladies that face the world's citizens.

If the U.N. member nations insist upon open antagonism toward the United States at seemingly every turn, then the time has come to reexamine our role as their benefactor. It is counterintuitive to financially reward countries whose motivation is in opposition to American efforts. In order to correct this problem of incongruity, I propose a simple solution.

My amendment would cause the United States to end all financial assistance to those countries who vote against us more than 50 percent of the time in the United Nations. That also includes an end to training the soldiers of nations who oppose us. The ban on our funding antagonistic nations, however, would not begin until March of 2006. March 31 of 2006, the next report will come out that says how everyone voted on each position. This will give all such countries notice of the coming consequences of their action.

The rationale is simple. They are sovereign nations, they can make their own decisions, but we do not have to pay them to hate us. Throwing money at our enemies has made them more contemptuous, not less.

I share the concerns of many Americans about the U.N., its bureaucracy and its approach to world problems. They run counter to U.S. values and interests. The U.N. is currently an inefficient bureaucratic organization badly in need of reform, and too often it has become a forum for radical anti-American rhetoric and policies that would violate many of our Nation's most cherished freedoms, laws, customs and recognized human rights.

My amendment simply stops the flow of American tax dollars to countries that claim to be our allies and who are happily taking the hard-earned tax dollars from American pockets, then using the money to spew anti-American venom all over the world.

My constituents in east Texas have told me, I have heard it around the country time and time again, they are fed up with this anti- American rhetoric coming out of the U.N. that their money is paying for. Surely we can find a better use of this money than to fund nations that oppose all we hold dear. On numerous occasions I have had citizens ask me why government is sending their money overseas to support governments and countries that are against the amendments and things for which we stand.

Some say we should be more loving and send these billions of dollars anyway. Friends, your heart may be good, but you are not using your head. I have relatives and friends that I love with all my heart. I would give my life for them, but if they are doing things to demean and destroy the very things I am fighting to preserve, I would not send them money.

Accordingly, and in conclusion, we do not have to pay these countries to hate us. We do not have to fund our opposition. If a foreign nation wants to take the tax dollars of hard-working Americans, well, then they better start helping us seek truth, justice and freedom's ways at least 50 percent of the time.

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

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

In response, and of course I have nothing but utmost respect for the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and it is a pleasure for me to support your amendment, and all three of the distinguished gentlemen that spoke bring up a good point. The Secretary of State does need flexibility, and that is why in this amendment I provided flexibility. If the Secretary of State certifies that there has been such a change in the regime attitudewise, personnelwise, that he or she firmly believes that the next session they will be voting with us more than half the time, then that makes an exception, and they will get funding.

Well, I am nearly done. But that makes an exception. That gives them flexibility.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California.

It extends in whole if they are going to vote with us more than 50 percent of the time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank our ranking member for yielding, and also for your leadership and for making sure that wherever genocide is occurring, you take action to stop it, Mr. Lantos. Thank you so much.

I want to thank also Chairman Hyde and Chairman Smith for their leadership and for making sure that as we move forward in addressing this atrocity that we work together in a bipartisan fashion. It is so important that the world see Democrats, Republicans, Independents, all of us coming together on this issue.

And to Mr. Payne, let me just thank you again for your leadership, for being oftentimes the lone voice in the wilderness and for staying there and plugging along and making sure that this House and the other body puts this as a priority because you knew early on what was taking place when many did not. So thank you for your leadership.

And let me also thank Mr. Royce and all of those who have been working and in the forefront of this effort because all of us understand now that we can no longer stand by as millions of innocent people are being displaced and hundreds of thousands are being murdered.

I visited Chad and Sudan last year with Chairman Royce and the Academy Award nominee Don Cheadle, and let me tell you we visited those refugee camps on the Chadian-Sudanese border.

Children drew pictures of airplanes flying with bombs dropping. Then they had the helicopters going underneath the airplanes. Then the militia, the Janjaweed on the horses, coming in burning and raping women and kidnapping people. These pictures were vivid that the children painted. It convinced me that the Khartoum government was clearly responsible for this slaughter.

We visited also just recently with our great minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, El Fasher and the refugee camps around the AU headquarters. Quite frankly, it has gotten worse. I want to thank Congresswoman Pelosi for her leadership, because we were able once again, and you heard her earlier, to visit the refugee camps and talk to people and see and learn what we must do in order to stop this slaughter.

This is an important bill. It addresses not only the immediate needs of the Darfurian people, but also the long-term goals of a political settlement. First of all, it also asks the Secretary of State to declare the Janjaweed a terrorist organization, because that is what it is, and we need to be very clear on that. The AU is currently doing a remarkable job, and this legislation helps us to help the AU in a better way in terms of providing for more support. They need more troops.

This legislation also blocks assets and restricts travel of any individual the President determines is responsible for acts of genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity in the Darfur region.

It also supports the International Criminal Court's efforts to prosecute those responsible for acts of genocide in Darfur.

Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that my provision for capital market sanctions, which our subcommittee approved unanimously, did not stay in the bill as it moved forward, but my provision to support state- sponsored divestment campaigns throughout our Nation is in there.

I want to thank our Chairs for making sure that that is there, because efforts to divest from companies that support the Khartoum regime should be applauded and the growing divestment movement must be supported.

The University of California is getting ready to divest, Harvard University has divested, Stanford has divested, as well as the States of Illinois, New Jersey and Oregon. These provisions with regard to divestment are very important.

Mr. Speaker, this bill makes sure that we step up to the plate now and put some teeth into our declaration of genocide. We cannot have another Rwanda, Mr. Speaker. One million people died, and all we could do there was go there later and apologize. Sometimes you see some of us wearing ``Not on Our Watch, Save Darfur,'' because we do not intend to have on our watch another genocide of that magnitude. 200,000 people is too many already. One person is too many.

So this bill will help us address the growing humanitarian crisis, and also the security crisis. In the long run, of course, we know that we must have a political solution and a peace accord.

I want to thank all of you, again, for making sure this remained a bipartisan effort.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in absolute strong support of H.R. 3127, the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act. I thank Mr. Lantos, our ranking member of the International Relations Committee, for his continued leadership on issues of importance to the committee, a person who can speak of genocide, being the only Member in Congress who is a Holocaust survivor. So this is very personal, as it is with all of us.

I would like to thank Chairman Hyde for the work that he and his staff did for being open to negotiations with me and my staff and other Members as well as those of other members of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, chaired by Representative Smith, my friend from New Jersey, who has done an outstanding job chairing the subcommittee.

I would also like to thank Congressman Wolf for his continued work, who for many, many years has been involved in Sudan; and Congressman Tancredo, who went to Southern Sudan on his first CODEL a number of years ago with Senator Brownback and myself; and to Melvin Watt of the Congressional Black Caucus and Barbara Lee and others who have stood shoulder to shoulder opposing this horrendous genocide.

It was nearly 2 years ago on June 24 in 2004 where I stood with the Congressional Black Caucus, Leader Pelosi, and Tom Tancredo and introduced H. Con. Res. 467, declaring that genocide was occurring in Darfur, Sudan and that the government of Sudan was responsible. This is the government which harbored Osama bin Laden for 5 years in his country and aided and abetted him and assisted him.

Tragically and to our own shame, the genocide continues today, almost 2 years later, unabated. Many people were surprised when the Congress approved the genocide resolution. And then the next night Senator Frist, with unanimous consent in the Senate, had the genocide resolution passed in the Senate and the President indicated at the United Nations that genocide was going on after Colin Powell declared it for the State Department.

Mr. Speaker, I have walked through the camps of the Darfur people who were violently forced by government troops and the Janjaweed mercenaries to run for their lives. I have seen the faces in the pictures that Leader Pelosi showed and to hear the horror stories.

Try to imagine what it is like to run away from everything you have known in an instance at gunpoint, to look back at your home, at your village, to see them engulfed in flames. Imagine the cries of scores of men and women, young and old, being brutally killed, terrorized, raped, beaten.

What continues to go on in Darfur today is the ultimate form of terrorism. An estimated 400,000 have already died from murder, starvation, diarrhea, and preventable diseases. Nearly 3 million were forced from their homes into other parts of the region or into Chad. Now the security nightmare has spilled over because the Janjaweed has gone into Chad. And this is the same government that for 20 years had a North-South war where 4 million people were displaced and 2 million people died. So this is a government responsible for 6 million displaced people, 2\1/2\ million people dead. This government does not deserve to even be called a government.

Truthfully, it is difficult to imagine. We are half a world away, safe. That is why we bear even a greater responsibility.

What can we do? We must call on President Bush to immediately push the National Congress Party to disarm the Janjaweed, to give the command to the government troops to stop killing innocent people, stop raping, to send those responsible for atrocities in Darfur to appropriate international authorities as called for in Security Council Resolution 1593, and to comply with Security Council Resolutions 1564, 1591, and 1556.

Whether they are government officials such as Security and Intelligence Chief Salah Gosh or Vice President Taha, who leads the Janjaweed, as alleged, we must make sure that this ends.

I would like to just conclude by saying even in my district on Sunday, April 9, the End the Genocide-Save Darfur will be having a rally with the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish World Service, the United Jewish Communities of MetroWest, Help Darfur Now. So everyone is coming together.

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking Chairman Hyde, Ranking Member Lantos, Africa Subcommittee Chairman Smith and my good friend and long time collaborator on Sudan related legislation and issues, Donald Payne of New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, we all know the numbers: the genocide in Darfur has claimed 400,000 lives and displaced over 2.5 million people. More than 100 people continue to die each day; 5,000 die every month.

Led and supported by their puppet masters in Khartoum, the Janjaweed militia have raped, pillaged, killed and according to this Congress, have committed acts of genocide against Darfur's innocent inhabitants.

Mr. Speaker, despite the efforts of this Congress and the numerous governmental and non-governmental organizations who are active on the ground in Darfur, the situation continues to deteriorate: atrocity crimes are continuing and people are still dying in large numbers from malnutrition and disease.

The humanitarian situation remains catastrophic, due to layers of aid obstruction, the lack of an overall humanitarian strategic plan, and the weakened state of displaced Sudanese. Refugees and internally displaced civilians (IDPs), a disproportionate number of them women, are in terribly weakened states, subject to sexual abuse and without adequate shelter. The numbers of at-risk civilians continue to increase. And as need far outstrips the ability of agencies to deliver aid, localized famine is feared.

To be perfectly frank, I find it reprehensible, Mr. Speaker; simply reprehensible that the international community has failed to act on the promises made after the Holocaust that never again would genocide occur on this planet.

While I stand here today as a Member of Congress and applaud my colleagues for their efforts, I also stand here outraged that the United Nations and NATO have allowed despicable war criminals in Khartoum, the same criminals that once provided safe harbor to Osama Bin Laden and as of Monday, have denied a senior U.N. official from entering Darfur, to dictate the method by which the international community may respond to acts of genocide.

Despite my sadness Mr. Speaker, despite my outrage, I come to the floor today slightly uplifted over the fact that later today this body will vote on and hopefully pass H.R. 3127, the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act.

As I have stated repeatedly during the various markups of this legislation, the final version of this bill is certainly not what I had hoped for; despite the best efforts of my staff and others, there is no authorization of force language; the sanctions could have been stronger; there was no mention of a no fly zone; the list goes on.

Despite these shortcomings, Chairman Hyde's legislation provides the President with the necessary authorization authority to help alleviate the suffering of the people of Darfur;

It denies entry to U.S. ports to certain cargo ships if the Government of Sudan fails to take specified peace measures in Darfur; prohibits, with waiver authority, U.S. assistance to a country that violates U.N. Security Council Resolutions that prohibit military sales to Sudan; and while the bill provides the President with the authority to direct our Ambassadors to NATO and the U.N. to take various action to stop the genocide in Darfur; and while those Ambassadors have acted accordingly; as I mentioned earlier, both of those organizations have been sluggish and as of now ineffective in taking proactive action to prevent further atrocities.

Mr. Speaker, no matter how stringent this piece of legislation could have been, it would not have ended the killing, the rape and the pillaging that continues to occur in Darfur.

While the President has taken some action to alleviate the suffering of innocent Darfurians, some is simply not enough when a genocide is occurring on our watch.

As I conclude, it is my hope that this piece of legislation sends a signal to Khartoum that this Congress will not stand by idly while the innocent are slaughtered; in addition, I hope the President will increase his pressure on the international community to take decisive action to end the genocide and bring those responsible to justice.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I have a chart here which the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) prepared, and I think you can see all the scandals at the United Nations. This has been shown several times. I think it is a good reminder to all of us that the U.N. is obviously in need of serious reform. I commend Chairman Hyde and his reform bill for doing just that. I think it ensures the reforms that we need.

My amendment is very simple. The main part of the Hyde bill is to withhold U.S. contributions to the regular assessed budget of the U.N. unless they make real and substantial reforms in the way they operate. So his underlying legislation calls for a 50 percent

withholding, and my amendment simply increases that to 75 percent. I think you can think over it in terms of a glass half full, half empty, his 50 percent. My amendment would make it 75 percent empty, which I think for most people is a real clear sign we should do something. So it is not just adding more teeth, it is also one of symbolism.

I think just to review, we all know the U.N. is not as effective as it could be, not to mention all these scandals. The number one scandal is the Oil-for-Food program that we are still investigating, and we still have not got to the bottom of this scandal.

I think the American people, understandably, have sort of lost faith in the United Nations. It does not seem to be fulfilling its founding mission, as long as it continues to coddle dictators and appease terrorists. There is an ever-growing list of grievances against the United Nations, and suggested reform is desperately needed. If not, we will continue to pour hundreds of millions of American taxpayers' dollars down into what I call a bottomless pit. So leveraging our dues this way is the only way we can ensure the U.N. makes the necessary change.

Now, the question would be what is the difference, as I mentioned, between 50 and 75 percent? I think in real dollars and real impact, this will be more important, to move it to 75 percent. For many of us who feel strongly about this, it gives a little more weight to it.

I would also say, Mr. Chairman, that I had a dream last night, and this dream was of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on the international Relations. In this dream he was puzzling how much to withhold from the U.N. until they enact the necessary reform--so in his great wisdom. As he sat in his chair in my dream, he set in a magnificent chair, and there were clouds and harps all around him, and he was deliberating very carefully whether to do 50 percent or 75 percent. He finally decided, after much deliberation, to do 50 percent. But I could tell in this dream that in his heart of hearts he wanted to have 75 percent.

So, Mr. Chairman, the dream I had of you convinced me that I should come down to the House floor today and offer 75 percent as a humble way to extend your feelings that were in my dream.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to reclaim my time, because the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) is very eloquent, and I would like to continue to have a little less say on my amendment. If he is accepting my amendment, I would sure appreciate his support.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time, and I would say to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) that tonight I will try to get more sleep, because I have spent so much more time dreaming, and perhaps tonight he will be in my dreams. And I will be dreaming that he wished that we would have had the amendment at 95 percent instead of the 50 percent.

My colleagues, when you come down to the House floor to vote on the amendment, I want you to vote ``yes'' for the Stearns amendment because in your heart of hearts, in fact in the heart of hearts of Chairman Hyde in my dream, he wanted 75 percent.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, and urge my colleagues to join me in voting yes on this important piece of legislation. I commend Chairman Hyde and my fellow New Jerseyans, African Subcommittee Chairman Chris Smith and Ranking Member Donald Payne for bringing this bill to the floor and helping keep our focus on the terrible crisis in Darfur and humanitarian needs in Sudan.

Three years ago, the people of Sudan began a bloody civil war, with two rebel groups in the South rising up against the government in Khartoum. The response from the Sudanese government was swift and brutal, and its aerial bombardment and support of the criminal militia known as the Janjaweed continues today throughout the country. But what has been done in the Southern region of Darfur is beyond anything we have seen in many years.

Mr. Speaker, it was not lightly that Congress declared the situation in Darfur a genocide on July 22, 2004. The government and its Janjaweed allies have killed hundreds of thousands of its non-Arab citizens in the region, and this genocide continues unabated today. More than two million civilians have been displaced from their homes, over 100,000 fleeing to neighboring Chad, and these refugees live in the most difficult situations, still surrounded by Janjaweed abusers and fearful for their safety. Rape has been widespread, and as the Janjaweed move across the region they leave a path of destruction that makes living nearly impossible for the few survivors left behind.

The military of the African Union, now 7,000 strong in Sudan, is doing valiant work but has never received adequate support. The recent discussions with NATO and the United Nations to bring additional forces and military material to the peacekeeping and stabilization mission are promising, but are not enough. The bill under consideration today would authorize much needed assistance to the African Union Mission in Sudan, and direct the President to support the expansion of this force to strengthen their work to bring peace to the region.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a cosponsor of this bill, which lends significant support to ongoing efforts to end the crisis in Darfur. The bill supports the use of sanctions on the government of Sudan to pressure it to end its support for the Janjaweed and return to the negotiating table. Only through strong U.S. involvement will there be an end to the violence in Darfur, and this bill provides the backing the administration needs to take further action.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that the American people are in firm support of the U.S. taking action on Darfur, and are strongly moved by this tragedy, which some have likened to the Holocaust. In my own district, a wide range of faith communities have joined together in the South Jersey Interfaith Coalition to Save Darfur. I am proud to be an honorary co-chair of this group which brings together people from southern New Jersey to take action on this issue. I am also proud of the students of Voorhees Middle School, who, with the help of their teacher Joyce Laurella, organized ``Project: Save Darfur,'' which has raised awareness of the crisis as well as money for UNICEF activities in Sudan. Individual action can make a difference, and the U.S. government should join its citizens in mobilizing on this important issue.

Mr. Speaker, time is of the essence in this matter, which grows more dire every day. We cannot stand idly by, as we did in the face of the genocide in Rwanda and in the early stages of the Nazi holocaust, and then report sadly from the gravesites of those who died. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, and support these steps to end the genocide.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding the time, and I want to express my enormous respect for the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), my dear friend, with whom I agree on some things but not on this issue, although the majority of the bill I know is consistent with the gentleman from California's (Mr. Lantos) and my view, although I do rise in strong support of the Lantos substitute and in opposition to the underlying bill, but it is with great respect; and I appreciate the opportunity to work with my colleague on this and many other issues.

It is no secret that the United Nations is going through a period of intense soul-searching, precipitated by increasing evidence that it has become an ineffective and unwieldy institution that long ago lost sight of its reason for being.

When the world changes, its institutions must change with it or become irrelevant, and so the U.N. has embarked on a mission to adapt to the changing times. As the Nation most involved in the founding of the U.N., the United States has an obligation to play a key role in this reform process.

Reform cannot, frankly, come quickly enough. The U.N. suffers today from a credibility gap around the world and for good reason. The Volcker Commission has exposed some uncomfortable truths about the Oil- for-Food program. The U.N. has dragged its feet in addressing some of our world's worst crises, such as the Darfur genocide, and has been impotent on human rights issues; and the record of the U.N. and many of its member states with respect to Israel has, frankly, been abominable.

In many ways, the U.N. is broken; but we must remember that it remains and must remain a central actor in global affairs. The organization has provided critical resources to nations coping with great poverty and social dislocation.

The U.N. Population Fund has reduced the number of unintended pregnancies around the world through basic family planning services.

UNICEF is the premier organization combating childhood disease in poor countries.

Agencies like the United Nations Development Program have raised living standards by improving governance, health, and education.

For millions around the world, the U.N. is not some distance bureaucracy. It is a hot meal for a hungry family. It is a doctor for a pregnant mother. It is protection for a first-time voter, and it is peace for a war-ravaged village. Indeed, even when the U.N. efforts fall short, and they often do, progress toward international cooperation is made, and recognition of common interests and values is encouraged.

As many have said, the U.N. is the kind of organization we would have to invent if it did not already exist. A strong U.N. is good for the United States and good for the world.

So enacting the Hyde bill, which is more about punishment than reform, simply does not serve, in my judgment, the best interests of this country.

In requiring a mandatory 50 percent cut in the United States dues to the U.N., unless 32 of 39 specific reforms are achieved, the Hyde bill provides no flexibility whatever to the State Department to negotiate with other U.N. member states. Rather than providing Secretary Rice a tool to encourage ongoing U.N. reform negotiations, it ties her hands.

The Lantos substitute would call for most of the same reforms as the Hyde bill, while providing the Secretary of State with room to maneuver to get real reforms passed.

It is a common-sense way to achieve the changes we all agree are needed with the right balance of diplomacy and muscle. And while I support the goals of the chairman, I cannot endorse his means, and I urge my colleagues to support the Lantos substitute and defeat the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, H.R. 3127.

This important bill would block the assets and deny visas and entry to any individual (and family member) responsible for acts of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity in Sudan. H.R. 3127 authorizes support for the African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur. It prohibits U.S. assistance to a country in violation of U.N. Security Council embargo on military assistance to Sudan. It also urges a Security Council resolution supporting expanding the African Union peacekeeping mission.

For too long the world community turned its back to the ongoing genocide in the Sudan. But the actions of students, religious leaders, and concerned citizens in the United States and around the globe raised awareness about the horrors occurring in Darfur. I want to thank all who shared with me their concern about Darfur in town hall meetings, letters, phone calls, and e-mails over the last three years.

Today the Congress is answering their calls for action. Passing this bill is an all important step to ending the genocide and beginning to hold those who are guilty accountable.

Yet, today there is great suffering in Darfur. The murders continue. The brutal violence still occurs. The rapes persist. People still live in fear. Since 2003, over 200,000 innocent civilians have been slaughtered. More than two million Sudanese civilians are displaced and many live in temporary refugee camps. More disturbing, over three million Sudanese are in need of humanitarian assistance.

The images are stark. The stories are horrifying and sickening. But each one is the picture or story of a single person: a fellow human. We need to remember that we are all bound together in a common existence and a member of the global community. Those who have been slaughtered and those who are suffering in Darfur are family. They are our brothers, they are our sisters. They share the same earth we do and we share a commitment to their safety and wellbeing. My faith, and the faith of many others, says that it is immoral to sit idly by.

Our commitment to end this conflict and to the people of the region must not begin and end today. We must remain focused and dedicated to ending the genocide and healing the wounds of a prolonged civil war. Justice must be served on those who perpetrated these heinous immoral crimes and we must help rebuild and restore the lives of the people who, through the grace of God, survive this hellish civil war.

We, here in Congress, have worked to end this civil war before. We went on record in September of 2004, declaring Darfur a genocide. Just recently, the House approved over $550 million to pay for additional peacekeepers, increased humanitarian assistance and resettlement of refugees. This money is essential to maintaining the current peacekeeping mission and ease the suffering of those who are displaced.

It is long past time for the United Nations to become involved in Sudan. The UN needs to deploy a robust and sizable international mission to end the genocide and then work to bring peace to the Sudan.

After the systematic genocide of the Holocaust, we said never again. After the horrors of Rwanda and the Kosovo we committed ourselves to preventing genocide before it surfaced elsewhere. Sadly, we are close to adding Darfur to this list.

I call on the President to continue to push this issue with world leaders and push in the United Nations to end the genocide in Darfur and to internationalize the response. I pray that the suffering will soon end, but that we will not soon forget our brothers and sisters in Africa.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act. This legislation is a much needed step towards ending the unprecedented tragedy taking place in Sudan, and its consideration today is long overdue.

Over the past 3 years, the world has watched as the situation in Darfur has escalated into an unprecedented humanitarian and human rights crisis. Since February 2003, civilians in the impoverished Darfur region of Sudan have been subject to indiscriminate killings, abductions, torture and rape at the hands of the Janjaweed--a lawless militia that has the alleged support of the Sudanese government. It is clear that the government of Sudan has offered their tacit approval for these attacks, and in many instances has engaged in air and ground strikes to augment the Janjaweed assaults on the people of Darfur.

The scope of this ongoing tragedy is hard to imagine. The numbers, unfortunately, speak for themselves. An estimated 3.5 million people are starving and some 2 million have been displaced from their homes, including hundreds of thousands who have fled to Chad for refuge. When then Secretary of State Colin Powell called the crisis in Darfur ``genocide'' in September 2004, an estimated 50,000 people had been killed. That number may now reach

as high as 400,000 today, with 180,000 of these deaths occurring in the past 18 months alone according to the United Nations. These numbers continue to grow everyday; however we may never fully appreciate the enormous human toll these atrocities have taken on Sudan, the continent of Africa, and the world.

The atrocities taking place are nothing less than a human tragedy, a world wide cause that we cannot ignore--and yet the international community remains essentially paralyzed and unable to stop it. To date, there have been 8 rounds of peace talks, the deployment of 6,000 African Union troops, 6 U.N. Security Council resolutions and declarations of genocide by the administration and this Congress. Despite this pressure, the Sudanese government has steadfastly refused to take any constructive steps towards ending this humanitarian crisis.

As the leader of the free world and a role model for human rights and democracy, we must live up to our own example. To this end, the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act takes several important steps toward increasing pressure on the government of Sudan to end the current crisis. Among its many provisions, this legislation strengthens sanctions on individuals and governments responsible for, or connected to, the atrocities in Darfur. It also provides strong support for the expansion of humanitarian and peacekeeping efforts in the region, and calls for the suspension of Sudan's membership in the United Nations. While this legislation alone will not end the atrocities in Darfur, it will send a strong message to Sudan and the world community that the U.S. is serious about bringing an end to the violence.

Many grassroots groups around the country, such as the Connecticut Coalition to Save Darfur, have been working to educate policymakers and the public on the urgent need for action in this troubled region of the world. Their efforts have ensured that the crisis in Darfur stays in the public mind and today's consideration of the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act is a testament to their tireless work. I am proud to support this legislation, and strongly urge its quick approval in conference so that we can get this important bill to the President's desk without delay.