Encouraging the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly, and promote a free and independent press.

Madam Speaker, I seek to claim time in opposition.

Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

The gentleman asks for unanimous consent to split the time between himself and Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. I have already claimed time in opposition. What does the Chair rule on that?

Madam Speaker and my colleagues, as Chair of the Hungarian American Caucus, I want to bring to the attention of this Congress the concerns that have been raised about H. Res. 915, legislation which ``encourages the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly, and promote a free and independent press.''

This legislation issues broad condemnation of the Republic of Hungary without regard to current legal proceedings that should receive more discussion. I urge my colleagues to consider the consequence of this legislation before casting a vote.

It's already been stated that the Hungarian Prime Minister has given statements questioning the award of the contract, that there is a parliamentary committee looking into it, that courts are reviewing it, and that, in fact, there's a prosecutorial investigation in the offing.

I have contacted the Hungarian Government, and in response to this congressional inquiry, the Hungarian Government pointed out that the licenses awarded to two national radio stations by the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board are under judicial review before the court: ``A criminal procedure related to the issue was launched with the prosecutor's office.''

Now, if this doesn't indicate a responsiveness by the government to the award of the contract, I don't know what does. The question then comes, Why is this even on the floor of the House as a suspension?

I stand by the right of every Member of this body to protect the interest of any business in any district. That's what we're here for. But I think that to put this resolution before the House for passage before any committee meetings have been held to review the actual extent of the Hungarian Government's involvement or lack thereof is really not consistent with our duties and due diligence on every piece of legislation.

Now, the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board awarded 12- year licenses to two national radio stations in 1997, to two companies, one based in the United States and another in Europe. The licenses expired last month and are the only licenses that allow for nationwide coverage by commercial rather than state-run radio broadcast services in Hungary. Following a national bidding process, the licenses were awarded to two Hungarian companies. Members across the political spectrum in Hungary have raised concerns regarding the manner in which the licenses were issued, and a U.S.-based telecommunication company filed legal proceedings in Hungarian court.

Now, the legislation accurately states the importance of foreign investment and a need for equitable treatment in accordance with the United States and Hungarian laws. However, broad condemnation of the Republic of Hungary, charging the country, or implying, that there's widespread corruption without allowing legal processes to take place is more than problematic. This dispute should be resolved in Hungarian courts, which can render judgment and provide sufficient remedy to the injured party including, if they care to, revoke existing licenses, forcing a new round of competitive bidding, or awarding compensation. I mean, these are all things that the Republic of Hungary has the opportunity to do.

But I just want to go back to the legislation itself, which raises questions about the integrity of the government itself. And, frankly, I don't think that's appropriate given the scope of the legislation and the grievances that Members have about the contract-awarding procedure.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, this resolution encourages the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law. Now, if you're encouraging someone to respect the law, the underlying assumption is that they don't.

I think that to look at the action of a single agency and to put a broad brush on an entire national government is really grossly unfair. To imply that Hungary does not respect the law is actually an insult to the people of Hungary, who put their lives on the line in 1956 fighting to break free of domination by the Soviet Union, who put their lives on the line to be able to establish a democracy and self-determination.

Is this what they deserve? Do the people of Hungary really deserve to be treated this way? This should have been handled diplomatically. This should have been handled at a committee level before bringing it to the floor of the House of Representatives. And with respect to foreign investors, since the Government of Hungary has itself launched an investigation into the award of this contract, doesn't that show that they want foreign investors to be treated fairly? Doesn't it show that they respect the rule of law by going forward to raise the potential of prosecution of people involved in the award of this contract? Don't we already have what it is that this legislation supposedly aspires to, evidence of respect for the law and fair treatment of foreign investors?

There is no evidence that the Republic of Hungary has suddenly taken a tilt towards Soviet-type control of the press; I hope that no one is seriously asserting that. Hungary is a proud and free society, and we should be very careful about moving forward with resolutions that in any way imply otherwise, not to say simultaneously, well, Hungary is a law-abiding nation, and then say, well, they ought to respect the law.

So again, I wish that the sponsors of this legislation, who I deeply respect and who I know are working very hard for their constituents and the business community as well as for all the people in their districts. I would say take another look at this and maybe send it to committee so that we could have the opportunity to have a deeper discussion about the advisability of the legislation, and maybe to tailor it even more firmly. I mean, I could agree with questioning the action by the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board--the Hungarian Government is questioning that action, but to challenge the entire government's integrity when the government has already taken action to raise questions itself about the award of a contract, really we have to ask what we're doing here.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?

I question why this resolution was brought before this House under suspension. I question why an effort by the proponents of the legislation wasn't made to contact the Hungarian Government and to learn that their position is in fact that there is a judicial review and that there is a criminal procedure related to the issue that was launched with the prosecutor's office because that would clearly indicate action being taken on the part of the government to look at this particular contract.

Why is this matter on the floor of the House of Representatives? Why are we taking this time to look at something that is already under review by the Hungarian Government and doing it in the context of urging the Hungarian Government to have respect for law? That's what they're doing, they are showing respect for law by taking this forward. Why do they need to be encouraged? Everyone here understands what that means; we're implying that they don't respect the law unless their judicial response is a certain way. That is not an appropriate way to proceed here. And again, it is very difficult when you have a colleague who you want to agree with on everything present a resolution with which you don't agree.

I reserve the balance of my time.

As my colleague has stated, this resolution is intended to address the actions of the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board; they are the ones who awarded the contract. But yet, in the same breath, we're asking the Hungarian Government to respect the rule of law. Is

there any other example, other than the action of a single board, that any proponent of this legislation can point to which indicates that the Republic of Hungary does not respect the rule of law? Or are we simply talking about one agency? Because if we're talking about one agency, then the resolution should have been written in a different way. Because the impact of this resolution is not going to be just to talk about the decision of one agency, it is going to imply, very broadly, that the Government of Hungary does not respect the rule of law. That passage should have been struck from this legislation.

I ask my colleague, Mr. Engel, if you look at the second part of the enactment clause, if he would consider striking that.

I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Parliamentary inquiry.

Is a motion to strike in order by the manager of the bill, or would the sponsor of the bill have to ask for such a motion?

So since this legislation is being offered under suspension, then no motion to strike would be in order; is that right?

Okay. I withdraw my request for a colloquy with my friend from New York.

I just think if it was so important to bring this to the floor, it should have been tailored quite narrowly to talk about the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board and not to take a broad brush with which we paint the Government of Hungary.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I think that in the time that I had allotted, I had an opportunity to present my point here. And I just hope that when my colleagues vote on this later on in the day that they will consider the diplomatic implications of voting for this resolution.

And I will say again, and this is really a concern that I have that I want to express to the leaders of the House of Representatives, we have a lot of bills that come to this floor under suspension that appropriately should be discussed in committee before they come to the floor of the House. I think this is a good example of such a bill. And I would ask our leadership to please pay more careful attention to these issues because this House has very valuable time, and while we have the freedom of speech on this floor, the speech gets very expensive when there are so many other issues waiting for discussion on the floor.

I appreciate the opportunity here. I want to thank my colleague, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for what she has expressed and for the concerns that Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Engel have expressed.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

With all due respect to my good friend, Mr. Engel, you have compared this to a tempest in a teapot. It's your teapot and it's your tempest.

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

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 915) encouraging the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly, and promote a free and independent press.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly) for introducing this important resolution.

Let me just say in 1989 Hungary joined its Central and Eastern European neighbors in throwing off the mantle of communist rule. By taking the brave and unprecedented decision in that year to open its borders to Austria and to allow East Germans to travel freely to the West, Hungary played a decisive role in bringing about the end of the Cold War. In the 20 years since, Hungary has become a member of NATO, the European Union and a strong partner of the United States.

Hungary is working side-by-side with the U.S. in Afghanistan, where it leads the provincial reconstruction team in Baghlan Province, and it has been a partner in conflicts in Iraq and in the Balkans. We greatly appreciate Hungary's staunch support in these and many areas.

However, we have become concerned about recent reports of possible unfair treatment of foreign investors in Hungary and possible efforts to inject politically motivated demands into the commercial process. In particular, we are concerned by the actions of the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board, ORTT, in deciding not to renew the national radio licenses for two foreign companies, one of which is American- owned, and to award them instead to two local bidders.

In 1997, the ORTT awarded to the foreign companies the only two licenses to provide commercial, rather than state-owned, nationwide broadcast services. Those licenses expired on November 19 of this year.

According to widespread media reporting, the two foreign companies have alleged that before their renewal bids were due, they were approached by representatives of Hungary's two leading political parties, offering to ensure their licenses would be extended if they agreed to the representatives' demands for a percentage of the company's equity and a say in editorial content.

The two foreign companies refused, and the ORTT awarded the licenses to the two local bidders instead, who had submitted tenders that many outside experts have said are not commercially viable.

The day following the award, the chairman of the ORTT resigned in protest, claiming that the two local bidders' contracts were flawed and economically unsound. Numerous commentators have indicated that on the face of it, the ORTT's decision clearly appears to have been politically motivated and have ignored the economic feasibility of the two local bidders' tenders.

Madam Speaker, American companies have invested over $9 billion in Hungary since 1989. Hungary's economy, as with every other country, has been severely affected by the global economic downturn. We support U.S. companies' investment in Hungary, but we note that events such as this case give rise to questions about the fairness and transparency of doing business in Hungary.

We welcome the Prime Minister's commitment to investigate any complaint relating to foreign investments, and the decision by the Hungarian Parliament's Constitutional and Justice Committee to set up a body to examine the radio license transaction.

Hungary is a close friend and ally of the United States, and we urge the government to take all necessary steps to ensure that foreign investors are treated fairly. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to split the time evenly in favor of the resolution with my colleague, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen of Florida.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly).

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I just want to answer the gentleman from Ohio, for whom I have profound respect. And I want to do it by just reading what this resolution says because I don't think it implies what he thinks it implies.

First of all, at the start of the resolution we talk about the brave people of Hungary and how they rose up against domination, Communist domination, Soviet domination in 1956, and whereas the Hungarian people fought bravely for freedom, democracy and human rights. And we talk about celebrating the fact that they have become a member of NATO and a member of the European Union. And at the end the bill simply says, and let me read it, ``Resolved, that the House of Representatives (1) condemns the recent action by the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board that awarded the national community radio licenses; (2) encourages the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law and treat foreign investors fairly; and (3) encourages the Republic of Hungary to maintain its commitment to a free and independent press.'' I don't think that implies anything; I think that it encourages them.

And obviously this resolution is bipartisan. It was a company from Indiana that was wronged, and that is why you have Mr. Donnelly, Mr. Burton and Mr. Pence from different parties, but all from Indiana, very concerned about this as well. So I don't think this casts any aspersions on Hungary, its people, or its government; quite the opposite, I think clearly in the resolution it celebrates the great partnership and alliance that we have with Hungary and all the brave things that the Hungarian people did during the past 50 years. I just wanted to point that out.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the author of this resolution, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly).

Well, let me say to my friend that it is not my resolution; it is Mr. Donnelly's resolution. I don't think it is appropriate for me to strike anything.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Madam Speaker, I would just urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill. This really is not a controversial bill. This is really, with all due respect, a tempest in a teapot. I think that simply, again, I will read the first sentence----

Let me just finish and I will be happy to yield. I would read the first sentence in this resolution, which says, ``Encouraging the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly, and promote a free and independent press.'' I don't think anyone can disagree with that, not even my friend from Ohio. And I will now yield to him.

Well, let me say to my friend, it's not my tempest and it's not my teapot. I wish the gentleman had come to us earlier before we were having the vote scheduled. We did not know of his objections prior to this debate. And perhaps if he had come to us a little bit earlier we might have been willing to accommodate him, but not knowing about it and being blindsided by his objection, I think it's kind of a little bit difficult to change it.

No, I have yielded enough.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 915, a resolution of the House of Representatives encouraging the Republic of Hungary to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly, and promote a free and independent press.

I would like to thank my Indiana colleagues, especially Congressmen Joe Donnelly and Baron Hill, for their yeoman's work on this issue. Chairman Howard Berman and Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen also were instrumental in bringing this important resolution to the floor.

What could and should have been a fair competition to rebid Hungary's only two national, commercial FM radio broadcast licenses is now mired in allegations of political corruption. As nine embassies in Hungary including the United States warned in a joint letter last month, we are concerned that such instances of non-transparent behavior affecting investors could discourage foreign investment and hamper economic growth in Hungary. This concern is underscored by a report commissioned by the Public Procurement Council in Hungary, which recently found that between 70 and 90 percent of all public procurements in Hungary are tainted by corruption.

The broadcast licenses previously held by Slager Radio (owned by an Indianapolis-based company) and Danubius Radio (owned by a Vienna-based private equity firm) were recently awarded by the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board (ORTT) to other bidders despite unrealistic business plans and irregularities in those bids that I am told should have disqualified them under Hungarian media law. Not only that, but prior to the ORTT's highly controversial decision, Slager and Danubius were reportedly approached by agents of the Fidesz and Socialist parties seeking to acquire partial control of the stations to ensure their licenses would be renewed. Although the ORTT chairman resigned in protest and refused to sign the contracts, the delegates appointed to the ORTT by the Fidesz and Socialist parties all voted in favor of the two new stations. A poll of Hungarians suggested that six of out ten agreed that the decision to end the broadcast rights of Slager Radio and Danubius was ``outrageous.''

Slager and Danubius have appealed the ORTT decision, but litigation could drag on for years, while their popular broadcasts were forced off the air on November 18 of this year, the same day we introduced this resolution. In addition, the Hungarian parliament voted to investigate the matter and a prosecutor is looking into whether criminal charges are warranted. I am encouraged by these steps and it is certainly my hope that the matter will be expeditiously resolved.

U.S. and other foreign investors deserve equitable treatment in accordance with Hungarian law. It bears mentioning that the United States is the fourth-largest contributor to foreign investment in Hungary and the largest non-European source of investment. The United States has invested over nine billion dollars in Hungary since 1989.

Unfair treatment of foreign companies will deter investment and hinder economic growth, while upholding the rule of law and promoting a free and independent press--as we urge in this resolution--would instead spur investor confidence.

In conclusion, we bring this resolution to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives today in solidarity with all Hungarians demanding a through and expeditious investigation into the highly questionable circumstances surrounding the awarding of these radio licenses and fair competitions in public procurements that will demonstrate Hungary's commitment to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly and promote a free and independent press.

Madam Speaker, unfortunately, I missed the following recorded votes on the House floor during the week of Monday, December 7, 2009, to Friday, December 11, 2009.

For Tuesday, December 8, 2009, had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 931, on motion to instruct conferees regarding H.R. 3288; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 932, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to Con. Res. 199; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 933, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Con. Res. 206; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 934, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 940; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 935, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 845; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 936, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H.R. 2278; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 937, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 915; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 938, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 907.

For Wednesday, December 9, 2009, had I been present I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 939, on ordering the previous question to provide for consideration of H.R. 4213; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 940, on agreeing to H. Res. 955); ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 941, on motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3951; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 942, on motion to table appeal of the ruling of the chair regarding H.R. 4213; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 943, on passage of H.R. 4213; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 944, on motion to suspend the rules and pass, as amended, H.R. 3603; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 945, on agreeing to the resolution H. Res. 956; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 946, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H.R. 86.

For Thursday, December 10, 2009, had I been present I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 947, on ordering the previous question to provide for consideration of the Conference Report to H.R. 3288; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 948, on agreeing to H. Res. 961, which provides for consideration of the Conference Report to H.R. 3288; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 949, on agreeing to the Conference Report to H.R. 3288; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 950, on motion to suspend the rules and agree to H.R. 4017; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 951, on agreeing to H. Res. 962; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 952, on agreeing to H. Res. 964, which provides for consideration of H.R. 4173; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 953, on agreeing to the Frank amendment No. 1 to H.R. 4173; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 954, on agreeing to the Sessions amendment to H.R. 4173; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 955, on agreeing to the Lynch amendment to H.R. 4173; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 956, on agreeing to the Murphy (NY) amendment to H.R. 4173; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 957, on agreeing to the Frank (MA) amendment to H.R. 4173; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 958, on agreeing to the Stupak amendment to H.R. 4173; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 959, on agreeing to the Stupak amendment to H.R. 4173.

For the morning of Friday, December 11, 2009, had I been present I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 960, on agreeing to the Kanjosrki amendment to H.R. 4173; ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 961, on agreeing to the McCarthy (CA) amendment to H.R. 4173; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 962, on agreeing to the Peters amendment to H.R. 4173.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 915, a resolution that encourages Hungary to respect the rule of law, treat foreign investors fairly, and to promote a free and independent press.

I appreciate the words of my good friend from Ohio, but I would just like to say that this resolution expresses our concern and condemns the Hungarian Radio and Television Board's process in granting these licenses. It does not question the Government of Hungary's efforts and it does not question our full confidence in their ability to resolve this matter. We welcome the government's steps in moving this forward.

For decades the Hungarian people fought against communist rule for the chance at freedom and democracy. They have been our ally, they joined NATO in 1999, and the country of Hungary is a good and dear friend of the United States of America. We must ensure that this friendship continues to maintain in a healthy and engaged way and that it continues to foster economic growth for our countries.

In 1997 the Hungarian National Radio and Television Board, ORTT, awarded licenses for two national radio stations. One of these licenses was awarded to an American company, the other to a European company, each for a total of 12 years. These terms ended on November 19 of this year. The Financial Times reported on November 6 that shortly before these bids of renewal for the national licenses were due that the companies were approached by individuals claiming to represent various parties in Hungary.

They offered to extend these companies' licenses if they received 50 percent of the equity. Both companies refused this attempt, and the ORTT voted to award these licenses to two connected local bidders instead.

We want to ensure the fullness and fairness that will be provided by the Government of Hungary's review, and we want to make sure that this resolution expresses our concern and condemns the actions of the ORTT.

U.S. investors are an important part of the Hungarian economy and deserve equitable treatment. We have invested over $9 billion in Hungary since 1989. The friendship is strong, the friendship is unbreakable, and we are the fourth largest contributor to direct foreign investment in Hungary.

This resolution, as indicated, expresses our concerns and condemns the ORTT's actions, and we ask the Government of Hungary to treat foreign investors fairly and fully respect the rule of law, as we know they will. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, to pass House Resolution 915.

And I, too, have the greatest respect and friendship for my colleague from Ohio, but I did want to comment that we, in fact, did meet with the Hungarian Ambassador and did meet with him in my office here at the Capitol. And there is no implication in any way that Hungary does not respect the rule of law; in fact, we are very, very proud of the partnership and friendship that has been built with Hungary. What we are trying to do is express our concern about the conduct of the Hungarian Radio and Television Board, a concern we also expressed to the Hungarian Ambassador. And we are hopeful that this will be resolved in the near future.