To withhold United States funding from the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very simple amendment. It ensures that no funds in this bill can be used for programs at the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, otherwise known as WHINSEC. It does not affect the funds in the Defense appropriations bill where the majority of WHINSEC's funding is provided.

Last year was the first debate on the WHINSEC, the successor to the U.S. Army School of the Americas. Since last year, the WHINSEC has made a number of very disturbing decisions that bring into question its much-vaunted commitment to transparency and democratic values.

For example, last year's debate brought to light a number of human rights cases involving WHINSEC students and instructors. Instead of using these cases as an opportunity to review its practices and procedures, instead of strengthening the vetting process and fixing any problems that might exist, the WHINSEC chose to attack the messengers.

It asserted that Salvadoran Colonel Francisco del Cid Diaz, responsible for the notorious 1983 Las Hojas massacre, never attended the WHINSEC. I guess they didn't check their own records because here is his name on the list of 2003 graduates.

They attacked the reputation of the current Bolivian Human Rights Ombudsman, Waldo Albarracin, saying that he has no recollection of the military captain who had him kidnapped and tortured in 1997, the same Major Urzagaste who was at the WHINSEC in 2002. When Mr. Albarracin heard of this slander, he sent me a letter describing what happened to him and the role of Urzagaste.

Mr. Chairman, like similar cases regarding corruption charges against three Colombian officers who attended the school, the WHINSEC dismissed the horror of Mr. Albarracin's torture as without merit because the courts dropped the case. Are WHINSEC officials ignorant about how military officers acted with impunity in Bolivia during the 1990s? Or in El Salvador during the 1980s? Are they ignorant of how the Colombian military benefits from the worst culture of impunity in the hemisphere today? The fact that charges of kidnapping, torture, murder, drug trafficking and corruption are routinely dropped is a major problem with Latin American militaries, not a virtue. Even more disturbing is how the WHINSEC responded to criticism. It chose to build a fortress around itself, to make sure that no one in the public, no human rights organization, no foreign policy analyst, would be able to review the names of WHINSEC's graduates and instructors.

For the first time in the history of WHINSEC, including the 40-year history of its infamous predecessor, the

School of the Americas, Freedom of Information Act requests are being denied. I have in my hands the school's response regarding 2005 graduates. Every single name is blacked out. Look at it, 18 pages, completely redacted. Is this anyone's idea of transparency? Of open relations with human rights and other policy organizations? This was a deliberate choice. The practice of secrecy extends to WHINSEC's public relations materials, where not a single solitary name of any of its Latin American students or teachers appears. So blacking out the names of graduates wasn't a mistake. It wasn't an anomaly. It's a deliberate decision to keep information secret, to avoid any kind of independent scrutiny or oversight.

Is this the example we want our Latin American counterparts to copy? I hope not, Mr. Chairman.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. The gentleman hasn't been listening to me. The State Department letter that he is quoting is essentially a whitewash. That State Department letter says that Cid Diaz, who I mentioned who is responsible for the Las Hojas massacre, never attended the WHINSEC. I just showed you right here. This is from the WHINSEC. He

did. So the State Department was wrong. The State Department letter says that the Human Rights Ombudsman in Bolivia can't remember who his torturer was. I have a letter here from the Bolivian Ombudsman that says he feels he was slandered. So that letter is wrong. And I have proof that it is wrong.

And you talk about accountability. Where's the accountability? This is the first time ever that we can't track the graduates. The school doesn't want to track the graduates. They say they don't have the time. So it has been up to human rights organizations. This is what we get in return. How do we know? How does anybody know? We need to do a better job.

So you didn't listen to my statement, I would say respectfully to the gentleman from Georgia. What the State Department sent to you is wrong and I have the proof.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Chairman, there seems to be a disconnect here. Let me again try to be crystal clear.

The problem is that the WHINSEC takes no responsibility for knowing anything about the human rights records of their students before they come to the U.S. or when they return home. They say the vetting process is done by the State Department, and then they say they will not, will not, do follow-up after their students return to their home countries.

How can they then claim that their training is effective? Doesn't that require some kind of follow-up or tracking of graduates? Nobody has addressed the fact that, up until just now, we would have access. There was public access to the people who went to the WHINSEC.

That's how we knew about those who violated human rights, because we had the list. This is now the response that we get from this school about the people who attend the school, not just the students, but the instructors that they

bring in. Where is the transparency? Where is the accountability? What's wrong with laying a little sunshine in?

Look, our standing around the world has never been lower. I hate to tell you something, but in Latin America this is one of the most unpopular schools that exists in the United States of America. People think that this is a school responsible for training or at least turning a blind eye to human rights violators, not just from years ago but recently.

But, then again, we really can't tell you accurately and neither can you tell me accurately what the human rights records are of these people who are attending. Because it's all blacked out. I mean, this is not the way a school in the United States that trains for our military should operate.

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

Mr. Chairman, let me again make a point here that is that last year when we were debating this same issue, an Army officer trained at the School of the Americas murdered a DEA-trained anti- narcotics unit in Colombia. This is still happening every day.

We were told a little while ago that everything, we are referring to the distant past. Well, again, I mentioned the Bolivian ombudsman, Mr. Albarracin, who was tortured in Bolivia in 1997, and his torturer, Major Urzagaste, went to WHINSEC in 2002.

Again, I am going to keep on saying this. I don't have a problem with training foreign militaries. What I have a problem with is this: the secrecy, the lack of accountability, the lack of transparency.

I am going to tell you something. We are going to find out, sooner or later, who some of these people are; and we are going to find out that they are responsible for atrocities. I gave them an example of somebody who was admitted to the school after he had been accused of torture.

I mean, where is the vetting process? We need to do much better.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairwoman of the subcommittee, Mrs. Lowey.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I don't want any more reports. What I want is accountability. I want to know whose going there. I want to know what happens to them when they go back to their country. I want to know their backgrounds before they go to the school.

You know, we knew, we found out that 19 of the 26 trigger men who murdered in cold blood six Jesuit priests in El Salvador were graduates of the school because we had access to the names. We don't have access to the names anymore. And no report is going to give us access to the names.

We want transparency. We want accountability. There are problems here. We need to address them. That's our job.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I have great regard for the gentleman from Texas. But my question is, how do you know? Do you track all these people individually? Can you tell me that all these people whose names have been crossed out are pure, that they are following a code of human rights; that they're not guilty of atrocities against their people?

That's the point here. I'm not arguing against the U.S. being involved in training programs. What I'm saying is that there's something fundamentally wrong with a training program where everything is secret; where we're told everybody is great, but yet we can't have access to track down the people who go to that school. We need to change that.

Mr. Chairman, I'm not interested in going to visit a school and having hors d'oeuvres and a cocktail.

I'm interested in who goes to the school. That's what I'm interested in. I want to follow-up who goes to the school, who's admitted to the school. And we used to be able to have access to that information. And even though the school didn't track the graduates, human rights organizations did. We are now being denied access. I mean, where's the transparency? You all talk about all the great graduates of this school. How do you know when you get this in return? This is not an open, transparent process.

Furthermore, more and more countries in Latin America are saying we don't want to have anything to do with this school. Uruguay, Bolivia, Argentina, Costa Rica have all pulled out of the school. They don't want to have anything more to do with WHINSEC.

Mr. Chairman, we've heard a great deal today that without the WHINSEC the U.S. would not be engaged in Latin America. Well, with all due respect, the U.S. trains 15,000 or more Latin American military officers and troops each and every year, less than 1,000 of them at the WHINSEC. We are very engaged in Latin American militaries, and none of these other programs carry the negative baggage that the WHINSEC does.

We have heard that WHINSEC has trained the future leaders of Latin America. But, again, with all due respect, one of Latin America's problems has been that too many of its national leaders were from the military. We should be spending our time and our efforts on strengthening civilian and democratic institutions.

We have heard assertions that that the WHINSEC is transparent and promotes democratic values. But WHINSEC's own actions show those claims to be a lie. What else do you need to see? I mean, what else do you need to see?

Now, I suggest that instead of WHINSEC, we should support the model of Argentina. After separating from the WHINSEC last year, Argentina just opened a new military school where civilian, legal and human rights experts will teach every single military officer about the role of the military in a modern democratic state.

Mr. Chair, America's reputation with the people of Latin America is at the lowest level ever. Cutting the funding for the WHINSEC will send a powerful message to the people of Latin America who, hopefully, will be the real future leaders of their nations, that the U.S. Congress finally gets it.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to just close with a few personal remarks. When I was working for our dear friend and former colleague, Congressman Joe Moakley, six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper, and her 16-year old daughter were murdered in cold blood at the University of Central America in San Salvador.

It made me sick to my stomach when I learned that 19 of the 26 soldiers who murdered these priests are graduates of the School of the Americas. These priests were my friends, and I knew them. And over the years, we have raised concerns first about the School of the Americas and then its successor, the WHINSEC.

We have asked for transparency. We have called for accountability. We have asked for specific follow-up with the graduates.

Let me be perfectly clear. There's a reason why WHINSEC does not share information on its graduates and its teachers. They don't want us to do the follow-up. They don't want us to point out what they should be doing.

Passage of this amendment will send a strong signal to Latin America that we do care about human rights. But it will also send a signal to our own military that business as usual is not acceptable.

Vote ``yes'' on the McGovern-Lewis amendment.

La Paz, Bolivia, June 18, 2007.

Dear Honorable James McGovern, I am writing to you in

regards to the participation of police Captain Filmann

Urzagaste Rodriguez in human rights violations in Bolivia,

specifically in relation to his involvement in my kidnapping,

detention and torture.

The events took place in January of 1997, while I held the

presidential seat of the Permanent Assembly for Human Rights

of Bolivia (the country's largest non governmental human

rights organization). On the morning of January 25th of the

aforementioned year I left my residence and hailed a taxi in

direction to the University. After traveling approximately

300 meters, the taxi was intercepted by two other vehicles

from which a group of men dressed in civilian clothing forced

me out of the taxi and dragged me into one of the vehicles. I

did not have enough time to count the number of people but I

estimate the number to be between 8 to 10 men. Once in the

vehicle they proceeded to cover my eyes and forced me to lie

face down on the floor of the backseat. The vehicle then

drove to the outside of the city, I was able to notice the

difference as I felt the dust from the road hitting my face.

With the vehicle in motion I was subjected to torture by my

kidnappers. I could not see their faces and was unable to

identify them. By their actions I concluded that the

objective was to physically eliminate me or make me

disappear. Nonetheless, during the terrorist operative I

noticed a sudden change; I could hear an intensive exchange

of communications taking place between the men in the vehicle

and another source through hand held transmitters or walkie-

talkies. The vehicle made a sharp turn and seemed to head in

a direction back towards the city. After approximately two

hours I was placed in a closed room, surrounded by silence.

After noticing that I couldn't hear anybody breathing close

to me I removed the blindfolds and realized that I was in a

police holding cell, thus concluding who had carried out the

operation, there was no doubt that the police were

responsible.

Sometime during the night I was taken from the cell and

moved to a police administered clinic due to the lesions on

my body (I could feel a few broken ribs and I was unable to

move my body). Until that point, neither my family nor the

other members of the Human Rights Assembly were aware of my

whereabouts, but thanks to one of the doctors, whose identity

I guard to this day, who was kind enough to contact them over

phone on my behalf. Thanks to this information, a lot of

people were informed of my whereabouts within the hour.

Under international pressure and public scrutiny, the then

President of the Republic, Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, fired

the Police Chief. Nonetheless, the government protected the

identities of the authors of my kidnapping due to the

involvement of Minister Carlos Sanchez Berzain. This is why

those responsible have not been brought to justice.

The then Captain of the Bolivian Police, Filmann Urzagaste

Rodriguez, played a role in the events. This information was

obtained through the Bolivian police force, given that at the

time the event became public, high commanding police officers

began accusing one another. Unfortunately the officer [i.e.

Urzagaste] and others benefited by the impunity provided by

the powers of the political sphere.

This is what I can inform in summary of this particular

case.

In my condition as the current Defender of the People of

Bolivia [i.e. Ombudsman] and a human rights activist I

consider that the work your office has been carrying out to

obtain the definitive closing of the institution formerly

known as the ``School of the Americas'' to be of great

importance. Said entity is marked by a sad and shameful

history in our continent, it was there that the main

protagonists and authors of some of the worst crimes against

humanity executed in Latin America received instruction. I

send you my support and express my unconditional solidarity

in hopes that the legislative authorities of the United

Status attend to your request.

Sincerely,

Waldo Albarracin Sanchez,

Defender of the People of Bolivia.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last Name 2nd Last Name First Name Rank Country Course -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Acevedo............................ De Arbaiza............ Marta................. 1LT.................. El Salvador.......... LDR-4-2 Aleman............................. Molina................ Eduardo............... 1LT.................. El Salvador.......... LDR-4-2 Bolanos............................ Silva................. Luis.................. 1LT.................. Colombia............. LDR-1 Del Cid............................ Diaz.................. Francisco............. COL.................. El Salvador.......... LDR-4-2 Erazo.............................. Ojeda................. Sebastian............. 1LT.................. Chile................ NPME-8-3 Gomez.............................. Dominguez............. Fernando.............. 1LT.................. Chile................ DEV-2-6 Ramirez............................ Donoso................ Jose.................. MSG.................. Chile................ DEV-2-6 Rapiman............................ Cayul................. Oscar................. MSG.................. Chile................ NPME-8-3 Toval.............................. Plazas................ Javier................ 1LT.................. Colombia............. LDR-1-2 Acevedo............................ Mujica................ Sebastian............. MAJ.................. Paraguay............. CMS-6 Acosta............................. Lara.................. Delis................. SSG.................. Venezuela............ NPME-8-2 Acosta............................. Piantini.............. Catalino.............. LTC.................. Dom Rep.............. CMS-1-2 Acosta............................. Nunez................. Angel................. CDT.................. El Salvador.......... LDR-4-2 Acosta............................. Mesa.................. Fabian................ 2LT.................. Colombia............. TAC-6-2 Aduviri............................ Antezana.............. Jose.................. MSG.................. Bolivia.............. OJT Aduviri............................ Antezana.............. Jose.................. MSG.................. Bolivia.............. DEV-2-3 Aduviri............................ Antezana.............. Jose.................. MSG.................. Bolivia.............. NPME-8-2 Aguero............................. Alder................. Pastor................ MAJ.................. Paraguay............. CMS-7 Aguerre............................ Gutierrez............. Jorge................. PV2.................. Colombia............. TAC-8-2 Aguilar............................ Rojas................. Martin................ SSG.................. Panama............... TAC-6-2 Aguilar............................ S..................... Patricio.............. CPT.................. Ecuador.............. TAC-2 Aguilar............................ Valverde.............. Juan.................. CPT.................. Costa Rica........... DEV-2-4 Aguilar............................ Manzano............... Eduardo............... PFC.................. Chile................ DEV-2-6 Aguilera........................... Argueta............... Ronald................ CDT.................. El Salvador.......... LDR-4-2 Aguilera........................... Miranda............... Pablo................. PFC.................. Chile................ DEV-2-6 Aguirre............................ Stoaminga............. Edgar................. SPC.................. Ecuador.............. TAC-6-2 Alarcon............................ Mirand................ Pablo................. SGT.................. Chile................ NPME-8-2 Alarcon............................ Bustos................ Jose.................. PFC.................. Chile................ NPME-8 Alas............................... Luquez................ Hector................ MAJ.................. El Salvador.......... OPME-5 Albarracin......................... ...................... Antonio............... SGT.................. Colombia............. NPME-8-2 Alcantara.......................... Silva................. Pablo................. CPT.................. Mexico............... CMS-6 Aleman............................. Sanchez............... Llery................. 2LT.................. Honduras............. LDR-4 Alfonso............................ Forero................ Javier................ CDT.................. Colombia............. LDR-1-2 Aliaga............................. Llantoy............... Henrry................ SSG.................. Peru................. NPME-8-3 Almeida............................ ...................... Jaime................. LTC.................. Ecuador.............. CMS-5-6 Altamirano......................... ...................... Gabriel............... SGT.................. Ecuador.............. TAC-6-2 Alturo............................. Quintero.............. Alexadner............. SGT.................. Colombia............. NPME-8-2 Alverez............................ Buitrago.............. German................ 1LT.................. Colombia............. CMS-5-8 Alvarez............................ Ochoa................. Javier................ MAJ.................. Colombia............. OPME-5 Alvarez............................ Vejar................. Jorge................. SGT.................. Chile................ NPME-8-2 Alvarez............................ ...................... Pablo................. SGT.................. Uruguay.............. TAC-7 Alvarez............................ Palacio............... Rodrigo............... 2LT.................. Honduras............. LDR-4 Amarista........................... ...................... Victor................ SFC.................. Venezuela............ NPME-8-2 Amaya.............................. Gomez................. Jose.................. CDT.................. El Salvador.......... LDR-4-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.

Let me say to the gentleman from Georgia, their record isn't spotless. We presented five cases last year. I mean, maybe you weren't listening to the debate, but we did. And the problem with this year is this is what the WHINSEC gave us, so we can't follow up.

And to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, who I have great respect for, you know, I'm not against military training. And yeah, we need to do better. My amendment, by the way, doesn't cut off all funding for the WHINSEC. Most of that money is in the Defense bill. It only cuts off the money that is under the jurisdiction of this bill.

And yes, it does need to be improved. I don't know how anybody can vote against this amendment in light of the fact that this is their, WHINSEC's, example of transparency. How do we follow up on the graduates? How can we follow up on whether the people that are going there are human rights abusers when we get this in return?

Even under the infamous School of the Americas, we were given the names. That's how I found out that 19 of the 22 trigger men who murdered the Jesuit priests were graduates of the School of Americas. If I got this I never would have known that. This is what they have given us.

Now, this is not transparency. This is not accountability. You want that school to do better, we need to send a message on the floor of the House today that we're not satisfied with business as usual, and the way to do that is vote for the McGovern amendment.

I urge all my colleagues to vote for the McGovern-Lewis amendment. Let's take a stand for human rights. If this country stands for anything, it needs to stand out loud and four square for human rights, and this is one way to prove it. Vote for this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding and once again for her very valiant efforts to save lives of women and children throughout the world.

Let me first say I rise in strong opposition to the Smith amendment. This bill includes a very narrow provision to allow foreign NGOs to receive only U.S.-provided contraceptives. Chairwoman Lowey has additionally offered the amendment that clarifies the existing language in the bill to make it absolutely clear that this provision only allows for the donation of the contraceptives.

This provision has absolutely nothing to do with funding. The bill does not provide financial assistance to clinics or to NGOs. It simply allows those family planning organizations that have been denied USAID family planning funding under the global gag rule to receive contraceptives from USAID and domestic NGOs.

Again, it has nothing to do with providing assistance for abortions, which are already strictly and clearly prohibited in 10 other provisions in this bill, which, I must say, I am very disappointed with. But the fact is that those provisions are there.

By providing contraceptives, we will actually help to reduce abortions, reduce the spread of HIV and AIDS and save the lives of mothers and infants by reducing the number of high-risk and unintended pregnancies.

The negative impact of the gag rule, which, of course, as I said earlier, and you all know this, this bill leaves the gag rule in place, but the negative impact is well documented. Since it was reinstated in 2001, shipments of United States-donated contraceptives have ceased in 20 developing countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

The NGOs most affected are often the ones with the most extensive distribution networks and the largest outreach to young women in rural areas. They often provide the only family planning program in a region and they have suffered severely from the cutoff of contraceptive shipments. The Smith amendment would continue to punish these NGOs for running successful family planning programs and would effectively undermine the goal we all share to reduce abortions and HIV and AIDS around the world.

For the life of me, I don't understand why we are doing this, Mr. Smith. You know and I know that this does not tamper with, unfortunately, the global gag rule or Mexico City language.

So let's be straightforward. Let's be honest. What we are trying to do today is just save the lives of women and children.

Mr. Chairman, while I understand that the Chairwoman is prepared to accept it, this amendment causes me great concern.

Given Mr. King's history in opposition to the underlying provision, I believe that this amendment is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to leaving U.S. troops in Iraq long-term.

The bottom line is, Mr. Chairman, when our troops come home, they should all come home.

And three times, twice in 2006 and once this year Congress passed-- and the President signed into law--legislation prohibiting permanent military bases in Iraq.

The prospect of having long-term military bases would send the wrong message to our troops, the Iraqi people, and the world.

The prospect of an indefinite occupation fuels the insurgency by serving as a recruiting tool for insurgents and places targets on the backs of our troops.

The Iraq Study Group has recognized the importance of unequivocally declaring that we have no intention of remaining in Iraq permanently.

Key administration officials, including Secretary Gates have pronounced that we are not

going to establish permanent military bases in Iraq.

Even President Bush has declared that we `do not support an indefinite occupation' in Iraq.

Again, Mr. Chairman, I wish this were a genuine attempt to prohibit an indefinite occupation in Iraq.

I'm concerned that it is not.

prohibition on use of torture

Sec. 686. None of the funds made available in this Act

shall be used in any way whatsoever to support or justify the

use of torture by any official or contract employee of the

United States Government.

report on indonesian cooperation

Sec. 687. Funds available under the heading ``INTERNATIONAL

MILITARY EDUCATION AND TRAINING'' may only be made available

for assistance for Indonesia if the Secretary of State

submits a report to the Committees on Appropriations that

describes--

(1) Steps taken by the Indonesian government to deny

promotion to and to remove from service military officers

indicted for serious crimes; the extent to which the

Indonesian Government is cooperating with international

efforts to bring current and past officials to justice; and

that past and present Indonesian military officials are

cooperating with domestic inquiries into past abuses,

including the forced disappearance and killing of student

activists in 1998 and 1999;

(2) The Indonesian government's response to the report of

the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in

Timor-Leste and the June 2006 report of the report to the

Secretary-General of the Commission of Experts to Review the

Prosecution of Serious Violations of Human Rights in Timor-

Leste in 1999;

(3) Steps taken by the Indonesian government to implement

and enforce the 2004 Indonesian law which requires the

Indonesian military to divest itself of legal and illegal

businesses before 2009; and

(4) The extent to which the Indonesian government has

removed restrictions impending access to and travel within

the provinces of Papua and West Irian Jaya by United Nations

personnel, diplomats, journalists, international non-

governmental organization personnel and researchers,

humanitarian and human rights workers and others.

limitation on assistance to foreign countries that refuse to extradite

to the united states any individual accused in the united states of

killing a law enforcement officer

Sec. 688. None of the funds made available in this Act for

the Department of State may be used to provide assistance to

the central government of a country which has notified the

Department of State of its refusal to extradite to the United

States any individual indicted in the United States for

killing a law enforcement officer, as specified in a United

States extradition request.

governments that have failed to permit certain extraditions

Sec. 689. None of the funds made available in this Act for

the Department of State, other than funds provided under the

heading ``INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL AND LAW

ENFORCEMENT'', may be used to provide assistance to the

central government of a country with which the United States

has an extradition treaty and which government has notified

the Department of State of its refusal to extradite to the

United States any individual charged with a criminal offense

for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment without

the possibility of parole.

international monetary fund budget and hiring ceilings

Sec. 690. The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the

United States Executive Director at the International

Monetary Fund to use the voice of the United States to ensure

that any loan, project, agreement, memorandum, instrument,

plan or other program of the International Monetary Fund does

not penalize countries for increased government spending on

healthcare or education by exempting such increases from

national budget caps or restraints, hiring or wage bill

ceilings or other limits imposed by the International

Monetary Fund.

environment programs

Sec. 691. (a) Funding.--Of the funds appropriated under the

heading ``DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE'', not less than

$501,000,000 shall be made available for programs and

activities which directly protect biodiversity and promote

clean energy.

(b) Climate Change Report.--Not later than 60 days after

the date on which the President's fiscal year 2009 budget

request is submitted to Congress, the President shall submit

a report to the Committees on Appropriations describing in

detail the following--

(1) all Federal agency obligations and expenditures,

domestic and international, for climate change programs and

activities in fiscal year 2009, including an accounting of

expenditures by agency with each agency identifying climate

change activities and associated costs by line item as

presented in the President's Budget Appendix; and

(2) all fiscal year 2007 obligations and estimated

expenditures, fiscal year 2008 estimated expenditures and

estimated obligations, and fiscal year 2009 requested funds

by the United States Agency for International Development, by

country and central program, for each of the following:

(A) to promote the transfer and deployment of a wide range

of United States clean energy and energy efficiency

technologies;

(B) to assist in the measurement, monitoring, reporting,

verification, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions;

(C) to promote carbon capture and sequestration measures;

(D) to help meet such countries' responsibilities under the

Framework Convention on Climate Change; and

(E) to develop assessments of the vulnerability to impacts

of climate change and mitigation and adaptation response

strategies.

(c) Extraction of Natural Resources.--(1) The Secretary of

the Treasury shall inform the managements of the

international financial institutions and the public that it

is the policy of the United States that any assistance by

such institutions (including but not limited to any loan,

credit, grant, or guarantee) for the extraction and export of

oil, gas, coal, timber, or other natural resource should not

be provided unless the government of the country has in place

or is taking the necessary steps to establish functioning

systems for:

(A) accurately accounting for revenues and expenditures in

connection with the extraction and export of the type of

natural resource to be extracted or exported;

(B) the independent auditing of such accounts and the

widespread public dissemination of the audits; and

(C) verifying government receipts against company payments

including widespread dissemination of such payment

information, and disclosing such documents as Host Government

Agreements, Concession Agreements, and bidding documents,

allowing in any such dissemination or disclosure for the

redaction of, or exceptions for, information that is

commercially proprietary or that would create competitive

disadvantage.

(2) Not later than 180 days after the enactment of this

Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit a report to

the Committees on Appropriations describing, for each

international financial institution, the amount and type of

assistance provided, by country, for the extraction and

export of oil, gas, coal, timber, or other national resource

since September 30, 2005.

uzbekistan

Sec. 692. Assistance may be provided to the central

Government of Uzbekistan only if the Secretary of State

determines and reports to the Committees on Appropriations

that the Government of Uzbekistan is making substantial and

continuing progress in meeting its commitments under the

``Declaration on the Strategic Partnership and Cooperation

Framework Between the Republic of Uzbekistan and the United

States of America'', including respect for human rights,

establishing a genuine multi-party system, and ensuring free

and fair elections, freedom of expression, and the

independence of the media, and that a credible international

investigation of the May 31, 2005, shootings in Andijan is

underway with the support of the Government of Uzbekistan:

Provided, That for the purposes of this section

``assistance'' shall include excess defense articles.

discrimination against minority religious faiths in the russian

federation

Sec. 693. None of the funds appropriated for assistance

under this Act may be made available for the Government of

the Russian Federation, after 180 days from the date of the

enactment of this Act, unless the President determines and

certifies in writing to the Committees on Appropriations that

the Government of the Russian Federation has implemented no

statute, executive order, regulation or similar government

action that would discriminate, or which has as its principal

effect discrimination, against religious groups or religious

communities in the Russian Federation in violation of

accepted international agreements on human rights and

religious freedoms to which the Russian Federation is a

party.

war crimes in africa

Sec. 694. (a) The Congress reaffirms its support for the

efforts of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

(ICTR) and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) to bring

to justice individuals responsible for war crimes and crimes

against humanity in a timely manner.

(b) Funds appropriated by this Act, including funds for

debt restructuring, may be made available for assistance to

the central government of a country in which individuals

indicted by ICTR and SCSL are credibly alleged to be living,

if the Secretary of State determines and reports to the

Committees on Appropriations that such government is

cooperating with ICTR and SCSL, including the surrender and

transfer of indictees in a timely manner: Provided, That this

subsection shall not apply to assistance provided under

section 551 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 or to

project assistance under title II of this Act: Provided

further, That the United States shall use its voice and vote

in the United Nations Security Council to fully support

efforts by ICTR and SCSL to bring to justice individuals

indicted by such tribunals in a timely manner.

(c) The prohibition in subsection (b) may be waived on a

country by country basis if the President determines that

doing so is in the national security interest of the United

States: Provided, That prior to exercising such waiver

authority, the President shall submit a report to the

Committees on Appropriations, in classified form if

necessary, on:

(1) the steps being taken to obtain the cooperation of the

government in surrendering the indictee in question to the

court of jurisdiction;

(2) a strategy, including a timeline, for bringing the

indictee before such court; and

(3) the justification for exercising the waiver authority.

combatting piracy of united states copyrighted materials

Sec. 695. (a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary of State

may carry out a program of activities to combat piracy in

countries that are not members of the Organization for

Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including

activities as follows:

(1) The provision of equipment and training for law

enforcement, including in the interpretation of intellectual

property laws.

(2) The provision of training for judges and prosecutors,

including in the interpretation of intellectual property

laws.

(3) The provision of assistance in complying with

obligations under applicable international treaties and

agreements on copyright and intellectual property.

(b) Consultation With World Intellectual Property

Organization.--In carrying out the program authorized by

subsection (a), the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent

practicable, consult with and provide assistance to the World

Intellectual Property Organization in order to promote the

integration of countries described in subsection (a) into the

global intellectual property system.

(c) Funding.--Of the amount appropriated or otherwise made

available under the heading ``INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL

AND LAW ENFORCEMENT'', $5,000,000 may be made available in

fiscal year 2008 for the program authorized by subsection

(a).

oversight of iraq reconstruction

Sec. 696. (a) Section 3001 of the Emergency Supplemental

Appropriations Act for Defense and for the Reconstruction of

Iraq and Afghanistan, 2004 (Public Law 108-106; 117 Stat.

1238; 5 U.S.C. App., note to section 8G of Public Law 95-

452), as amended by section 1054(b) of the John Warner

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007

(Public Law 109-364; 120 Stat. 2397), section 2 of the Iraq

Reconstruction Accountability Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-

440), and section 3801 of the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans'

Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability

Appropriations Act, 2007 (Public Law 110-28) is amended--

(1) in subsection (h)(1) by striking ``pay rates.'' and

inserting ``pay rates, and may exercise the authorities of

subsections (b) through (i) of section 3161 of title 5,

United States Code (without regard to subsection (a) of such

section).'';

(2) in subsection (o)(1)(B) by striking ``fiscal year 2006

or fiscal year 2007'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2006

through 2008''; and

(3) by adding at the end of such section the following

subsection:

``(p) Rule of Construction.--For the purposes of carrying

out the duties of the Inspector General, any United States

funds appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal

years 2006 through 2008 for the reconstruction of Iraq,

irrespective of the designation of such funds, shall be

deemed to be amounts appropriated or otherwise made available

to the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund.''.

(b) Section 1054(a) of Public Law 109-364 is amended by

striking ``fiscal year 2006'' and inserting ``fiscal years

2006 through 2008''.

united nations headquarters renovation

Sec. 697. It is the sense of the Congress that the amount

of any loan for the renovation of the United Nations

headquarters building located in New York, New York, should

not exceed $600,000,000: Provided, That if any loan exceeds

$600,000,000, the Secretary of State shall notify the

Congress of the current cost of the renovation and cost

containment measures.

neglected diseases

Sec. 698. Of the funds appropriated under the heading

``Child Survival and Health Programs Fund'', not less than

$18,000,000 shall be made available to support an integrated

response to the control of neglected diseases including

intestinal parasites, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis,

onchocerciasis, trachoma and leprosy: Provided, That the

Administrator of the United States Agency for International

Development shall consult with the Committees on

Appropriations, representatives from the relevant

international technical and nongovernmental organizations

addressing the specific diseases, recipient countries, donor

countries, the private sector, UNICEF and the World Health

Organization: (1) on the most effective uses of such funds to

demonstrate the health and economic benefits of such an

approach; and (2) to develop a multilateral, integrated

initiative to control these diseases that will enhance

coordination and effectiveness and maximize the leverage of

United States contributions with those of other donors:

Provided further, That funds made available pursuant to this

section shall be subject to the regular notification

procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.

assistance for egypt

Sec. 699. (a) Foreign Military Financing Program.--Of the

funds appropriated by this Act for Egypt under the heading

``FOREIGN MILITARY FINANCING PROGRAM'', $200,000,000 shall

not be made available for obligation until the Secretary of

State certifies and reports to the Committees on

Appropriations that the Government of Egypt has taken

concrete and measurable steps to--

(1) enact and implement a new judicial authority law that

protects the independence of the judiciary;

(2) review criminal procedures and train police leadership

in modern policing to curb police abuses; and

(3) detect and destroy the smuggling network and smuggling

tunnels that lead from Egypt to Gaza.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Boustany

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the McGovern-Lewis amendment.

This important amendment will prohibit funding to the infamous Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC) formerly known as the School of the Americas.

We all know the history of this Institute that has long been associated with human rights abuses and many of its students have been tied to death squads and international coups.

Despite assurances to the contrary by supporters of the WHINSEC, the continuing legacy of blood and terror by these graduates calls into question how these candidates are recruited and vetted.

Mr. Chairman, at a time when our occupation of Iraq has greatly damaged our credibility and standing in the world, the last thing we need to be doing is funding an organization like WHINSEC that is drenched in a legacy of secrecy, terror, and violence.

I urge my colleagues to support the McGovern-Lewis amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I have one more speaker in this round.

The gentlelady has the right to close, is that correct?

Would the gentlewoman like to proceed, then?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).

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

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, this is the article that I referred to, Public Radio, I'll put it in the Record. It says, Morning Edition, April 23. ``During the past week, dozens of women in southwest China have been forced to have abortions even as late as 9 months into the pregnancy, according to evidence uncovered by NPR.'' It goes on, mentions a family which Liang describes how they told her that she would have to have an abortion. ``You don't have any more room for maneuver,'' he says they told her. ``If you don't go to the hospital, we'll carry you.'' The couple was then driven to Youjiang district maternity ward in Baise City. ``I was scared,'' Wei told NPR. ``The hospital was full of women who had been brought in forcibly. There wasn't a single spare bed. The family planning people said forced abortions or forced sterilization were both being carried out. We saw women being pulled in one by one.''

Now, in answer to Mr. Ryan's comment, Mr. Ryan, I led the opposition over here in opposition to PNTR. President Clinton was one of the biggest supporters. He accused President Bush, criticized him, and then switched and strongly supported it.

I have sent your office, with due respect, probably 25 letters asking you as a Blue Dog member to cosponsor a bill that I have, and I'll do it again, on the SAFE Commission. On my SAFE Commission I have eight Members from the Democratic Party, eight Members from the Republican Party, and I put everything on the table, tax policy. Someone on your side said there is no Republican over there that would do it. I put tax policy on it. Some of my people don't like it, but we do. We also put all the entitlements to save the country.

I agree with you. God bless you. I agree that the debt that the Saudis hold is terrible. The debt that the Chinese hold. And I would beg you, because I know you're a good person, I watch you in committee, I followed your campaigns, join me in the SAFE Commission. We can get a handle on this deficit that we have in the country. This places a partisan political pit, and both sides are at each other.

So what I want to do is what we did on the Iraq Study Group, get eight Republicans and eight Democrats, give 1 year, this is modeled after David Walker, the GAO, to go around the country and educate and talk to the American people and listen. And then we use the Base Closing Commission concept whereby this Congress has to vote.

You're right. The amount of debt that the Chinese hold is horrible and that the Saudis hold. And I have written you over and over. The fact is, I will say it right now, I've been surprised that I haven't had anybody from your side cosponsor, because I will stipulate you care about the deficit as much as I do, maybe as a newer Member you may actually care about it more. But I agree with you, and the SAFE Commission is the opportunity to deal with this.

If you look at the language in the package I'll send to your office, I put every single thing on the table. And if you would join me, I don't know if we could pass it in this Congress or not, but I think you're exactly right, we could help save this country because we are living off of Chinese money and Saudi money. And keep in mind, the Saudis funded all the madrasses up at the border. There were 15 Saudis funding the Wahhabis. The Saudis are funding radical, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic. So if we could come together and do that.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

The gentleman's concern, and the gentleman is a very good Member, and I appreciate when he speaks a lot of times in committee. I agree with him, and not only do I agree in my conscience, I vote with him, and sometimes I even speak for him. But it is an issue here of going to the groups that are involved, and I will put a copy of the article in the Record, but the two that I mention, and to give them the support whereby they would do these things. I can't speak for other people, but I think it would be wrong.

June 21, 2007

Cases of Forced Abortions Surface in China

(By Louisa Lim)

MORNING EDITION, APRIL 23, 2007.--During the past week,

dozens of women in southwest China have been forced to have

abortions even as late as nine months into the pregnancy,

according to evidence uncovered by NPR.

China's strict family planning laws permit urban married

couples to have only one child each, but in some of the

recent cases--in Guangxi Province--women say they were forced

to abort what would have been their first child because they

were unmarried. The forced abortions are all the more

shocking because family planning laws have generally been

relaxed in China, with many families having two children.

Liang Yage and his wife Wei Linrong had one child and

believed that--like many other couples--they could pay a fine

and keep their second baby. Wei was 7 months pregnant when 10

family planning officials visited her at home on April 16.

Liang describes how they told her that she would have to

have an abortion: ``You don't have any more room for

maneuver,'' he says

they told her. ``If you don't go [to the hospital], we'll

carry you.'' The couple was then driven to Youjiang district

maternity hospital in Baise city.

``I was scared,'' Wei told NPR. ``The hospital was full of

women who'd been brought in forcibly. There wasn't a single

spare bed. The family planning people said forced abortions

and forced sterilizations were both being carried out. We saw

women being pulled in one by one.''

The couple was given a consent agreement to sign. When

Liang refused, family planning officials signed it for him.

He and his wife are devout Christians--he is a pastor--and

they don't agree with abortion.

The officials gave Wei three injections in the lower

abdomen. Contractions started the next afternoon, and

continued for almost 16 hours. Her child was stillborn.

``I asked the doctor if it was a boy or girl,'' Wei said.

``The doctor said it was a boy. My friends who were beside me

said the baby's body was completely black. I felt desolate,

so I didn't look up to see the baby.''

Medical sources say fetuses aborted in this manner would

have been dead for some time, so the tissue is necrotic and

thus dark in color.

``The nurses dealt with the body like it was rubbish,'' Wei

said. ``They wrapped it up in a black plastic bag and threw

it in the trash.''

This was also the treatment given to the stillborn baby of

He Caigan. Family planning officials turned up at her house,

in the countryside several hours outside Baise, before dawn

on April 17 to force her to go to the hospital. This would

have been her first baby--but she hadn't married the father,

in contravention of family planning laws. She was already 9

months pregnant, just days away from delivery.

``They told me I'm too young, I couldn't keep the child and

I should have an abortion,'' she said. ``I'm too young to get

a marriage certificate--I'm only 19 and my boyfriend's only

21.''

After the forced abortion, her boyfriend left her. She said

that she's still in great physical pain and that her life had

been ruined.

An eyewitness, who requested anonymity for fear of the

consequences, said that he counted 41 occupied beds on just

one floor of the maternity hospital in Baise and that he

believed none of the women he saw had come to the hospital of

their own free will.

Coerced abortions such as these were not unusual after

China's one-child policy was first introduced in 1980. But a

law passed five years ago guarantees China's citizens a

degree of choice in family matters. When contacted for

comment, an official at China's State Commission for

Population and Family Planning said she'd heard nothing about

forced abortions in Guangxi and asked for more details. But

in Baise, a family planning official surnamed Nong

acknowledged that such behavior would violate regulations.

Despite the fact that these allegations refer to events that

happened just within the last week, he said an investigation

had already been held.

``We were very surprised to hear of these accusations,''

Nong said, ``but our investigation concluded some individuals

who were dissatisfied with our family planning policies were

fabricating stories. These facts simply don't exist. We

really love and care for women here.''

Official figures published by the Xinhua news agency shed

some light on why a forced abortion campaign might be judged

necessary. They show that the Baise government missed its

family planning targets last year. The recorded birth rate

was 13.61 percent, slightly higher than the goal of 13.5

percent. This is significant because the career prospects of

local officials depend upon meeting these goals.

Wei Linrong and her husband Liang Yage, were incensed by

their treatment, seeing it as little short of murder.

``I think their methods are too cruel,'' said Wei, ``my

heart really hurts. Such a tiny baby, it was innocent. And

they killed it.''

``Every time we talk about this child, we both cry,'' Liang

added. ``We can't bear talking about this child.''

Liang and his wife risked further official disapproval by

contacting a Christian group overseas to publicize their

plight. China may once have depended on its state apparatus

of control and fear to silence those who suffer human rights

abuses at the hands of its officials. But China's victims are

angry, and they want their voices to be heard.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

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

Reclaiming my time, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and in support of the committee's language. In fact, I think the language is very moderate, perhaps even, from my own perspective, a little bit too moderate because I think we could have put some other conditions on it.

Ayman Nour is still in prison. I visited Ayman Nour's wife. He is still in prison. He is not very, very well. We have interceded on his behalf, the Congress and everyone else. But Ayman Nour is still in prison.

The Coptic Christians. The life of the Coptic Christians is worse today than it has been for a long while. So if you're a Coptic Christian in Egypt, you're in trouble.

For the Baha'is, the Baha'is in Egypt just live the most miserable life that you can possibly live. They are not even recognized. They cannot even get a card for a driver's license. They are a nonentity. They are not even there. They are not. So they can't move. They can't do anything.

There is anti-Semitic and anti-Christian editorials and cartoons in their newspapers. Just look at what they say. The government controls those newspapers. So if a government controls a newspaper and anti- Semitism and anti-Christian language is in there, does that not mean that someone in the government is saying that?

Also, the language is moderate. They gunned down the Sudanese. I was there shortly after they gunned down the Sudanese. There are many Sudanese that live there, and they gunned them down. There is police brutality.

The Gaza. The gentleman, Mr. Lantos, was right with regard to the Gaza. They have a powerful military. They could be doing much, much more.

Egypt is a great nation. It is a great nation. They are great people. They are our friends. But friends have to be honest with friends.

Mr. Obey was exactly right. We have given them, Mr. Obey would have this figure better than I would, over $15 billion. Martin Luther King said, in the end, we will remember not the words that were of our enemies but the silence of our friend. As a friend, for us not to speak out on this issue, we would be derelict in our duty. We would be derelict in our duty.

So, Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, and in support of it, and would say to the gentlewoman, the Chairwoman, it would have sent a very refreshing message if one of the other conditionalities had been with regard to the Coptic Christians, who are very patriotic people in Egypt and who love their country and who always speak proudly of their country and who always honor their country; and also if we had conditionality language with regard to the Baha'is. But I think Mr. Obey is right. I agree with the Chairwoman. I would hope that we would defeat the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks) for a brief discussion on the issue of the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt.

I thank the chairman of the committee and thank the gentleman from Arizona.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I thank the gentleman, and I yield to the gentlewoman from Virginia Beach, Mrs. Drake.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment, and I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak).

Reclaiming my time, if I may, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to just yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

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

I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong opposition to the Smith amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the bill before us keeps the global gag rule intact, with one important exception. It would allow for the provision of contraceptives, not direct funding, to foreign NGOs to help reduce abortion, unintended pregnancy, and the spread of HIV/AIDS. The amendment I offer today makes absolutely clear that no funding would be provided to international organizations that do not comply with the Mexico City policy. In addition, the provision provides absolutely no assistance for abortion.

This is strictly prohibited in 10 other sections of the bill. Every provision in this bill has been kept there that forbids U.S. dollars going to abortion.

There are tremendous unmet needs for contraception in developing countries that most need this assistance to address population and health crises, including the spread of HIV/AIDS and unintended and high-risk pregnancies.

The global gag rule has only made matters worse for decreasing access in many countries. U.S. shipments of contraceptives have ceased to 20 developing nations, including in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. In some areas, the largest distribution centers for contraceptives have experienced decreased access for over 50 percent of the women they serve. This decline in access to contraceptives has led to increases in unintended pregnancy and in the number of women seeking postabortion care.

It is clear that withholding contraceptives, my friends, does not reduce abortion. Providing contraceptives is the way to reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions. The numbers speak for themselves. Increased use of contraceptives in the last two decades has been accompanied by significant declines in abortion rates in a number of countries. For example, in Russia, the abortion rate declined by 61 percent, as has been mentioned, between 1988 and 2001, as modern contraceptive use increased by 74 percent.

Proponents of the Smith amendment will make several false claims. They

may say that this provision would provide funding or assistance for services and products other than contraceptives directly to international NGOs who are not compliant with Mexico City. It absolutely will not.

They will argue that the Smith amendment will not cut family planning funds in this bill. However, it will dramatically decrease the effectiveness of our international family planning aid by withholding contraceptives to the areas of the world that need them most to prevent unintended pregnancies, abortions and the spread of HIV-AIDS.

The other side will also say that my provision encourages abortion as a means of family planning. Nothing could be further from the truth. Abortion is already illegal in many of the areas that would receive contraceptives under my provision, particularly in African countries. Furthermore, these organizations do not promote abortion as a means of family planning. They provide family planning to prevent unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing abortion.

You may also hear that by providing contraceptives, these organizations will be able to use their own funds for other purposes prohibited by Mexico City. I have already made clear the incredible unmet need for contraceptives. In Uganda alone, the average number of births per woman is 7.1, while the unmet need for family planning is reported by married women at 35 percent. The bill will provide donated contraceptives, not funding, to groups that are unable to provide enough contraceptives in areas with severe shortages.

Furthermore, contraceptives are not fungible. They are used for contraception. Period. By filling the unmet need for contraceptives, each year we can prevent 52 million unwanted pregnancies, an estimated 29 million abortions, 142,000 pregnancy-related deaths, and 505,000 children from losing their mothers.

It is clear that voting for the Smith amendment and against contraceptives is an extreme position that will in fact hurt our efforts to decrease abortion. So if you really want to decrease abortion, if you really say you are for family planning, if you really want to save lives, if you really want to decrease HIV/AIDS, which is spreading throughout the world, vote no on the Smith amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), a distinguished member of the committee.

Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), an outstanding member of the committee.

Madam Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Carnahan).

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

Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel).

Before I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from California, I would like to yield an additional 30 seconds for clarification to my good friend from New York (Mr. Israel).

I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

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

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

May I ask how much time is remaining on both sides, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to my good friend, Mr. Ryan.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

I yield to my good friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, I want to make it very clear in closing, we all may have different views about abortion. I respect your views. I may differ. Each person is entitled to their own conscience and their own views on abortion.

But this is not about abortion. Every provision forbidding U.S. dollars going to abortion is in this bill, and it remains in this bill. The choice is clear, my friend.

My amendment will provide donated contraceptives, reduce unintended pregnancies, reduce the number of abortions, prevent HIV/AIDS, save lives, save the lives of millions of poor people around the world. This amendment will save lives. Mr. Smith's amendment will lead to more abortions, put more lives at risk.

My friend, the choice is very clear. If you want to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, if you want to save lives, if you want to prevent abortion, you vote for the Lowey amendment and against the Smith amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment. And I want to be clear to my colleague from Iowa we all agree that the United States should not be an occupying power in Iraq, but in no way does my acceptance of this amendment come to my or the American people's acquiescence to establishing any other kind of short- or long- term basing agreements in Iraq. But we are accepting the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

My colleagues, this is a difficult and sensitive issue that the House has debated many times before in many different ways.

We all know that Egypt is an important ally of the United States. We all know that Egypt plays a very important role in the Middle East, and that role will even be more crucial in the months ahead. We all know that Egypt was the first Arab country to have made peace with Israel, and that the peace, while not nearly as warm or as forward-leaning as many of us would have liked, has held for close to 30 years. That is why Egypt has consistently received more foreign assistance in this bill than virtually any country other than Israel. And that is true of this year's bill as well.

Nevertheless, there is a frustration level with our very good ally over two key issues, the Egyptian Government's increasingly harsh response to dissent of any kind and the government's failure to take serious steps to stopping the smuggling from Egypt to Gaza.

When Israel withdrew all of its population and military forces from Gaza nearly 2 years ago, one of the biggest concerns was what to do about Gaza's border with Egypt. Some in Israel argued that Israeli forces should remain at the border to ensure that it did not become an opening to allow the smuggling of weapons and terrorists to Gaza. Those who argue that Israel needed to completely withdraw and that Egypt could effectively play that role ultimately prevailed. Israel and Egypt even reworked parts of their peace agreement to allow for an expanded Egyptian force on that border. Unfortunately, however, those forces have not done the job, have not stopped the smuggling.

As was highlighted so vividly during the recent fighting in Gaza, the forces of Hamas are very well equipped. The bulk of that equipment has come through that border. Especially now that Hamas has effectively taken over in Gaza, it is critically important that Egypt do everything within its power, including stopping these armed shipments before they even get to the Gaza border, to put an end to this deadly arms trade.

The language in the bill does not cut aid to Egypt, which many have wanted to do, I can assure you. It simply fences off a portion of Egypt's assistance, pending a report and certification by the Secretary of State that Egypt is taking steps to, one, enact a new judicial law; two, to curb police abuses; three, to detect and destroy the smuggling network into Gaza.

I believe it is a moderate and reasonable approach to two very difficult and important issues that we have discussed on numerous occasions, to no avail, with our good friends in Egypt.

Mr. Chairman, I'm very pleased to yield to my good friend from California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Lantos.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. Chairman, I'm delighted to yield 1 minute to Mr. Ellison.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. For years, many Members of Congress and activists, including the Maryknoll nuns based in my congressional district, fought to shut down the School of the Americas. The school's very existence was undermining United States efforts to promote civilian control of the military and respect for human rights in Latin America.

So the Army closed the school of the Americas and reopened it a few weeks later with a new name, WHINSEC. Past questions about the School of the Americas has still not been resolved, giving us no basis on which to build a better, more credible, effective program at WHINSEC. We need to shine the light on the past of the School of the Americas in order to put WHINSEC on track to be a beacon of light for the militaries of Latin America.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I move to strike the last word, and I'm pleased to yield to my colleague, Mr. McGovern.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, someday future generations of Americans will look back on us and wonder how and why such a rich and seemingly enlightened society, so blessed and endowed with the capacity to protect and enhance vulnerable human life, could have instead so aggressively promoted death to children by abortion.

They will note that we prided ourselves on our human rights rhetoric and record, while precluding unusually all protection to the most persecuted minority in the world today, unborn children. They will indeed wonder why it took so long to stop just one hideous method of death, partial-birth abortion--and why dismembering a child with sharp knives, pulverizing a child with powerful suction devices or chemically poisoning a baby with any number of toxic chemicals, failed to elicit so much as a scintilla of empathy, mercy or compassion for the victims.

Abortion is violence against children, Mr. Chairman. It is extreme child abuse. It is cruelty to children. It exploits women. In America, it has destroyed 49 million unborn babies and wounded countless numbers of women.

Now, as in previous years, some Members of Congress want to export the violence of abortion to Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia and Europe by reversing the prolife Mexico City policy and by providing in- kind assistance to some of the most vociferous pro-abortion organizations on the Earth. To counter that, Mr. Stupak and I are offering an amendment, to strike the pro-abortion enabling language contained in this bill.

First announced by the Reagan administration at a 1984 U.N. Population Conference held in Mexico City, hence its name, the current policy simply requires that foreign nongovernmental organizations agree, as a condition of their receipt of Federal assistance for family-planning activities, to neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning.

The three exceptions in the Mexico City policy are rape, incest and life of the mother.

Mr. Chairman, today, scores of countries throughout the world are literally under siege in a well-coordinated, exceedingly well-funded campaign to legalize abortion on demand, putting women and children at risk. Most of the pressure is coming directly from foreign nongovernmental organizations like the International Planned Parenthood Federation based in London. IPPF and its country affiliates perform abortions and lobby aggressively for abortion on demand.

IPPF, you will recall, in 1992 adopted an abortion manifesto called Vision 2000, a sweeping ``action plan.'' Vision 2000 says that IPPF and its affiliates, and I quote this, ``Will bring pressure on governments and campaign for policy and legislative changes to remove restrictions against abortions.'' The Mexico City policy puts a stop to enabling IPPF and likeminded groups from doing just that.

So it couldn't be more clear, Mr. Chairman, that if we provide either cash or in-kind contributions to abortion organizations, we empower them and we enable them to campaign to expand abortion. Instead, we should direct our funds and in-kind assistance, including commodities and contraceptives, to organizations committed only to family planning.

IPPF's vision, Mr. Chairman, is what I call a nightmare. Earlier my friend, Mr. Jackson, was talking about the least of our brethren in found Matthew is Gospel, Chapter 25. Who in this world fits the definition of the least of our brethren more than a helpless unborn child who is being killed by dismemberment or chemical poison? I don't know who. Unborn babies are the most vulnerable people on Earth, I say to my good friend.

IPPF's vision is a world of free abortion and unfettered access to subsidized abortion rights right up until birth. It is all in their documents. They're for abortions for minors even without any parental notification or consent, and they don't like conscience clauses for doctors and health care practitioners, either.

One only has to look at Planned Parenthood here in the United States to understand where their affiliates would take the rest of the world. The Planned Parenthood Federation of America has, for example, colocated family planning clinics with abortion mills. They annually perform 265,000 abortions every year in America, a quarter of all the abortions in our country a staggering loss of children's lives. One organization. They lobby and litigate to stop women's right-to-know laws and parental consent laws. They lobby in favor of partial birth abortion. If that is not child abuse, I don't know what is. Make no mistake about it, Mr. Chairman, that is what they want to do everywhere. We kid ourselves if we don't realize that and appreciate that.

The Mexico City policy, on the other hand, separates abortion from family planning in certain foreign aid programs. It ensures that family planning is the exclusive activity of the organization and not abortion. If we provide other cash or in-kind contributions or anything of value, we again empower, we enrich and we enable these organizations. It is all about whom we give to.

Finally, I would like to say with deep respect to my prolife colleagues, especially on the Democratic side of the aisle, some of whom are under intense pressure to support the other side and to oppose Mr. Stupak and me, if protecting babies and women from abortion matters to you, and I mean really, really matters to you, there is no way that any of us could work to overturn the Mexico City policy. This is the time to stand for the innocent and the inconvenient ones who can't speak for themselves.

I would remind my colleagues again that nothing in our language today cuts by a penny the money that is allocated in this appropriations bill for family planning. If you look, and we will do this again later, at one country after another, we have seen doubling and tripling, quadrupling even, of money going to countries, especially in Africa, for family planning under the Mexico City policy.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), the coauthor of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Tennessee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Musgrave).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds just to say that the previous speaker's comments missed by a mile what this is all about.

The Mexico City policy does not apply to a single country. It applies to organizations. Countries are expressly excluded from Mexico City policy. It is all about pro-abortion organizations, and whether or not we want to enrich and enable them to expand abortion. We want to put our money and in-kind contributions to those that have divested themselves from the killing of unborn children.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

First of all, we are not punishing. We are saying that, as a matter of human rights principle, that the killing of an unborn child rises to a sufficient level that we will pick other NGOs to whom we will give our dollars.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from Florida, Dr. Dave Weldon.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) control the remainder of the time.

Mr. Chairman, recently a new organization formed in the United States called the Silent No More Awareness Campaign. It is made up entirely of women who have had abortions. One of the women, Dr. Alveda King, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, has had two abortions. She is now one of the most passionate spokeswomen on earth in favor of the unborn child and in favor of protecting women from abortion and assisting women harmed and wounded by abortion. She has pointed out that women in America, and increasingly in the world in countries where it has been legalized, become the walking wounded and carry with them the deep emotional and physical scars of having had an abortion under the cheap sophistry choice. Dr. King used to be on the other side of the issue and she, like the other women in Silent No More, are now adamantly pro-life. Dr. King and so many others call on us today to defend life and not export abortion.

The Appropritions bill on the floor today provides $441 million for overseas family planning. That is in the bill. It's untouched by the Smith-Stupak amendment. But who we give grant money or inkind donations to matters. When you pour in-kind contributions into pro-abortion organizations whose raison d'etre, and just read their literature and Web sites and look at what they're doing in those countries, is to legalize abortion on demand and to promote abortion by way of clinics, you realize that a vote against the Smith-Stupak amendment is a vote to enable abortion on demand.

Abortion is child abuse. That may not be something nice to say on this floor, some of you may cringe over it because you think it's all about choice. Choice to do what? Dismember, chemically poison a child. These are children. Welcome to 2007. Ultrasound technology has shattered the myth that an unborn child is not human or not alive. Birth is an event that happens to each and every one of us. It's not the beginning of life.

Prenatal surgery has shattered myths concerning the unborn as well. Unborn children are patients. So let's give the money to the family planners overseas that are all about family planning, not abortion promotion.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.