Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Women's History Month. Each year, we pay special tribute to the contributions and sacrifices made by our nation's women. It is an honor to pay homage to outstanding women who are making a difference in my Congressional District. I would like to recognize a remarkable woman, Ruth Williams of West Hollywood.

Ms. Williams is one of the original founders of the City of West Hollywood. Incorporated in 1984, West Hollywood has been her home for over sixty years. Her history of activism and volunteerism in West Hollywood is astonishing. She has served as a member of the Eastside Redevelopment Project Area Committee since its inception, is a former board member of Good Neighbors, and has organized the annual Fourth of July Picnic and Holiday Food Drive for many years. With a strong commitment to public safety issues, Ms. Williams helped create the original Disaster Volunteer Core Committee, worked tirelessly with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to create neighborhood watch groups, and served on West Hollywood's Public Safety Commission. Ms. Williams also founded Citizens for Seniors and helped draft West Hollywood's first rent control ordinance while serving on the City's Rent Stabilization Commission.

As Director of Advocacy at the National Council of Jewish Women/Los Angeles (NCJW/LA), Ms. Williams has firsthand knowledge of the need for providing social services in the community. She strives to educate the community about current issues such as child abuse, human trafficking, domestic violence, teen bullying, and human rights, as well as advocate for domestic violence shelter funding. Many of the NCJW/LA programs under Ms. Williams' leadership have received statewide and federal recognition.

In addition to Ms. Williams' work in the community and with NCJW/LA, she is also active in the Hollywood National Organization for Women, is a former Chair and life member of the Fairfax High School Alumni Association, current Vice Chair of the Fairfax Business Association, and is involved in various political organizations. Ms. Williams has received numerous awards, including the 2010 Los Angeles County Older American Recognition Day Award, a City of West Hollywood Senior Advisory Board Award, and a city proclamation to recognize March 15, 2013 as ``Ruth Williams Day'' in honor of her 75th birthday.

I ask all Members to join me in honoring an exceptional woman of California's 28th Congressional District, Ruth Williams.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Women's History Month. Each year, we pay special tribute to the contributions and sacrifices made by our nation's women. It is an honor to pay homage to outstanding women who are making a difference in my Congressional District. I would like to recognize a remarkable woman, Christy Schilling of Glendale.

Ms. Schilling grew up in Burbank and Glendale and graduated from Burbank High School in 1990. She went on to attend California State University, Northridge, where she majored in Sociology/Social Welfare. Ms. Schilling is dedicated to improving the quality of life for people living throughout the Los Angeles area. From childhood, Ms. Schilling has been concerned about those less fortunate than herself. She interned with the Haven Hills Domestic Violence Shelter, after completing her degree in 1995, working to improve the lives of battered women and their children. She not only counseled victims of domestic violence, but also counseled pregnant and parenting teens.

In addition to her other volunteer efforts for people, she is a fierce protector of and advocate for animals. As she started volunteering with different animal groups, her passion for animal welfare grew. She realized that by helping pets, she was helping people and the whole community. Ms. Schilling has been an avid animal welfare volunteer for more than 15 years, resulting in her founding of The Animal Protectorates (TAPS), a non-profit animal advocacy organization. Ms. Schilling is devoted to educating people about the importance of spaying and neutering their animals, adopting animals, and reducing euthanasia rates in shelters. TAPS is dedicated to protecting animals in every possible way, supports other organizations aligned with the TAPS mission, and advocates unity among animal welfare organizations. With its committed and enthusiastic team and Board of Directors, TAPS is making a tremendous and positive difference for thousands of animals.

Ms. Schilling is the voice of abused and helpless creatures, and her contributions are reaching far and wide. Her mission to eliminate the sale of puppy mill pets in Glendale culminated in 2012 when the Glendale City Council passed its ordinance eliminating the sale of all puppy mill animals in Glendale. With the passage of this ordinance, Ms. Schilling's attention turned to a similar draft of a puppy mill ordinance in the City of Burbank, and Burbank's City Council passed the ordinance as well.

Throughout the years, Ms. Schilling has been a selfless volunteer. Her volunteer activities have included fundraising for the YMCA

child care programs and capital campaigns, Christmas in April home improvement projects for low income families, and planting seedlings with underprivileged children at Tree People. Her current volunteer activities include working with a local guild of Children's Hospital Los Angeles, and regularly donating blood at the Glendale American Red Cross. Ms. Schilling and her husband, Craig Schilling, live in Glendale.

I ask all Members to join me in honoring an exceptional woman of California's 28th Congressional District, Christy Schilling.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Nicholas Choung Lee, a Los Angeles police officer who selflessly served his community.

Nicholas served for years in the LAPD, first in the Van Nuys division and later in the Hollywood division, assigned to a patrol car. He had worked as both a field training officer and vice officer in Wilshire before returning to patrol in the Hollywood division in 2008. In his 16 years of service he received more than 70 commendations.

Even as a police officer, family came first for Nicholas, who had a wife, Cathy, and two young daughters, Jalen and Kendall.

Tragically, and much too soon, Nicholas passed away on April 6 when a truck hit his patrol car in Beverly Hills.

We depend upon the bravery and dedication of police officers every moment of every day, and we often forget the dangers and challenges they face on our behalf. I ask all members to join me in expressing our condolences to the Lee family and the entire LAPD.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Nicholas Choung Lee, a Los Angeles police officer who selflessly served his community.

Nicholas was born on May 8, 1973, in Seoul, Korea. When he was six years old he moved to California with his father Heung Jae Lee, mother Choung Ja Lee, younger brother Danny, and sister Jenny. They settled in Los Angeles' Koreatown, and Nicholas attended high school in Los Angeles and college at California State University Fullerton. He joined the Los Angeles Police Department on August 31, 1998.

After probationary training, Nicholas transferred first to the Van Nuys Division, and later to the Hollywood Division, where he was assigned to a patrol car. He worked as both a Field Training Officer and Vice Officer in Wilshire, before returning to patrol in the Hollywood Division in 2008. In his 16 years as a police officer, Nicholas received more than 70 commendations. He was recently among the officers featured in a birthday video for a 7-year-old-boy with leukemia, which was just one of the many ways Nicholas constantly demonstrated his selfless desire to help others.

As much as he contributed to Los Angeles as a police officer, everyone who knew him would agree that his family always came first. Nicholas married Cathy Kim in 2001, and they went on to have two daughters, Jalen and Kendall. He could frequently be seen riding a scooter alongside the two girls on their way to school. When the family would have barbecues, Nicholas was always the person serving his family and friends. His wife described him as a great provider and loving husband and father.

Tragically, and much too soon, Nicholas passed away on March 6, 2014, when a truck hit his patrol car in Beverly Hills. He is survived by his wife Cathy, and daughters Jalen and Kendall.

We depend upon the bravery and dedication of police officers every moment of every day, and we often forget the dangers and challenges they face on our behalf. I ask all members to join me in expressing our condolences to the Lee Family and the Los Angeles Police Department and pledge to remember the courage and commitment of Officer Nicholas Lee, a man who cared deeply about his family and the Los Angeles community.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today with the people of Ukraine and in strong support of this legislation, which will provide the administration with additional and immediate flexibility to assist Ukraine. I look forward

to working with the gentleman from Kentucky and my good friend from New York on further ways to assist Ukraine in the appropriations process.

This effort cannot be just about helping Ukraine. It must also be about reversing Russian aggression, curbing Vladimir Putin's revanchist policies in Russia's ``Near Abroad.'' President Obama's action this morning to cut off access to assets and place travel restrictions on those involved in the violation of Ukraine's sovereign is a positive first step. The pressure must be increased in the coming days if Russia fails to reverse course.

I support a slate of economic sanctions led by the United States and Europe to isolate Russia's economy and its leadership, so that Putin is made to understand that his violation of international law and the sovereignty of his neighbors will not be tolerated.

The collapse of the Soviet Union was one of the seminal events of the 20th century. The Cold War is over. Territorial aggression by Russia will not resurrect its empire but only diminish its standing in the world and the future of its people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the twenty-sixth anniversary of the pogrom against people of Armenian descent in the town of Sumgait, Azerbaijan, where Armenian civilians were massacred at the hands of the Azerbaijani regime. Beginning on February 27, 1988 and for three days, Azerbaijani mobs assaulted and killed Armenians. Hundreds of Armenians were wounded, women and young girls were brutally raped, and many victims of all ages were burnt to death after being tortured and beaten. The carnage created thousands of ethnic Armenian refugees, who had to leave everything behind to be looted or destroyed, including their homes and businesses. The Sumgait Pogroms were part of an organized pattern, and were proceeded by a wave of anti-Armenian rallies throughout Azerbaijan, which culminated in the 1990 Pogroms in Baku.

These crimes were never adequately prosecuted by Azerbaijan authorities. Despite efforts by the Government of Azerbaijan to cover up the events which occurred in February 1988, survivors of the pogrom have come forward with their stories. They told of enraged mobs, which threw refrigerators and furniture, among other belongings from apartment balconies and set them afire. Armenians were dragged from their apartments. If they tried to run and escape, the mob attacked them with metal rods, hatchets and knives before the victims were thrown into the fire.

The Sumgait massacres led to wider reprisals against Azerbaijan's ethnic minority, resulting in the virtual disappearance of a once thriving population of 450,000 Armenians living in Azerbaijan, and culminating in the war launched against the people of Nagorno Karabakh. That war resulted in thousands dead on both sides and created over one million refugees in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

In the years since the fighting ended, the people of Artsakh, the region's ancestral name, have struggled to build a functioning democratic state in the midst of unremitting hostility and threats from Azerbaijan, as well as incursions across the Line of Contact between the two sides, such as the recent murder of yet another Armenian soldier, Hrant Poghosyan, in an unprovoked attack by Azerbaijani troops against Armenian forces. Hatred towards Armenians is both celebrated and inculcated in Azeri youth, as exemplified by the case of Ramil Safarov, an Azerbaijani army captain who had confessed to the savage 2004 axe murder of Armenian army lieutenant Gurgen Margaryan, while the latter slept. At the time, the two were participating in a NATO Partnership for Peace exercise in Budapest, Hungary. After the murder, Safarov was sentenced to life in prison by a Hungarian court and imprisoned in Hungary.

In 2012, Safarov was sent home to Azerbaijan, purportedly to serve out the remainder of his sentence. Instead of serving out his sentence in an Azeri jail, he was pardoned, promoted to Major, given back pay and paraded through the streets of Baku in a disgusting and bloodthirsty welcome home.

With these appalling acts, the Azeri state reminded the whole world why the people of Artsakh must be allowed to determine their own future and cannot be allowed to slip into Aliyev's clutches, lest the carnage of Sumgait 26 years ago serve as a foreshadowing of a greater slaughter. Mr. Speaker, the memory of the victims of Sumgait must not be forgotten, and it is our moral obligation to condemn crimes of hatred, in hope that history will not be repeated.

Mr. Speaker, this evening, from the dais behind me, President Obama will deliver his annual State of the Union message; and while there are hopeful signs and a brightening of the economic outlook for the country as a whole, the President will almost certainly concentrate on the battles ahead.

Even as America struggles to shake off the effects of the worst downturn since the Great Depression, our economy and our society are being challenged by a yawning inequality gap that affects tens of millions of American families and threatens to erode the underpinnings of our social contract.

Last fall, economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty released an analysis of 2012 tax returns, and they found that the top 10 percent of American earners took more than half of the country's total income in 2012--the highest level ever recorded. The top 1 percent received more than 20 percent of the income earned by Americans, a level not seen since 1928, the year before the stock market crash and the beginning of the Great Depression. Top earners have also recovered more quickly over the last 3 years as their wages and investments have recouped value at a much brisker clip than those of the rest of Americans.

Inequality has also been a persistent political theme here and around the world, and it helped to launch the Occupy Wall Street movement. Last year, Pope Francis spoke out against what he termed an ``economy of exclusion'' while New York City's new mayor, Bill de Blasio, won the election by highlighting inequality there. President Obama, himself, made expanding opportunity a major theme in a speech in December, and he discussed the issue at length in his past two State of the Union addresses. I expect him to return to the theme tonight and in the coming months of the 113th Congress as we prepare to go to the polls in November.

There is a broadly held, national consensus that an overly high concentration of wealth spawns a host of economic social and political ills, but that agreement has not fostered a concerted strategy on expanding opportunity and closing the wealth gap. America has always rewarded hard work, and the possibility for a better life has been part of the attraction for generations of immigrants and others struggling to climb the economic ladder; but economic mobility, as a recent study from Harvard and Cal demonstrates, varies greatly within the United States, and while economic mobility has not changed significantly over time, it is consistently less prevalent in the United States than in most developed countries. We should never seek to punish success or to, as some describe it, soak the rich, but we must take steps to address the problem of growing inequality both in the short term and in the long term.

I believe there are three things that Congress and the President can do to give Americans and the middle class and those who aspire to join it the chance to move up:

First, we need to extend emergency unemployment assistance for those who are still looking for work and who cannot find a job on their own. The weekly litany of those who are losing benefits is disheartening, and we must not turn our backs on our fellow Americans;

Second, we need to raise the minimum wage nationwide, and it is shameful that it has been 5 years since the last increase. In fact, according to one study, the minimum wage today is actually worth $2 less than in 1968. Raising the minimum wage to just over $10, as I support, would push millions of hardworking Americans out of poverty and stimulate economic activity throughout the country;

These two steps can be part of a short-term solution that stops the bleeding, but real change requires giving American workers the education and training to compete domestically and internationally for the high-skilled, high-wage jobs that are the ticket to the middle class and beyond. Investing in education and building schools and curricula for the 21st century is a long-term project, but it is the one that has the greatest potential in terms of economic growth and increased opportunity while preserving the spirit of free enterprise and entrepreneurship that built this country.

Mr. Speaker, tonight the President will challenge us to join him in an effort to reinvigorate the American Dream for another generation. Let us join him in that sacred task.

Mr. Speaker, the political standoff between the two main political parties in Bangladesh has rocked that country and threatened its democracy, its stability, and its economic progress.

Throughout 2013 and in the run-up to elections last week, a series of general strikes paralyzed Bangladesh, and hundreds were killed in clashes between rival political factions. Opposition leaders and human rights activists were arrested, and Bangladeshi courts were used to target opposition figures and their sympathizers.

The feud in Bangladesh pits Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, the leader of the ruling Awami League party, against Khaleda Zia, a former Prime Minister who is the leader of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party, or BNP. The leaders, known to their countrymen as the ``two ladies,'' have dominated Bangladeshi politics since democracy was restored in the mid-1990s, when Hasina's Awami positioned itself as secular and social democratic in ideology and Zia's BNP as more centrist and religious.

Tense relations between the two women and their supporters were further inflamed last year when a third party allied with BNP was barred from participating in the elections and the government declined to dissolve itself in favor of a caretaker government that would exist only to supervise the elections. This had been the custom in Bangladesh in prior elections.

Prime Minister Hasina's actions convinced Ms. Zia that BNP would be better served by boycotting the polling, which the BNP did in the hopes that the government would be pressured into resigning before the vote. When the government did not accede to the BNP's demands, the opposition took to the street. But the government held firm and, amid diminished voter turnout and widespread violence, Awami swept last week's vote, deepening the crisis.

Born from a brutal civil war in 1971, Bangladesh has faced enormous challenges in its 43-year history--endemic poverty, one of densest populations in the world, and unpredictable weather that both sustains and destroys the country's year-round agricultural production.

Governance, too, has been a challenge, with the country consistently ranked among the world's most corrupt and the nation's institutions highly politicized. And nothing has come to symbolize the failure of governance like the garment industry and its horrific record on worker safety, a record that threatens the cornerstone of Bangladesh's economy.

In spite of these and a host of other challenges, Bangladesh has made remarkable strides. According to a report issued by the World Bank last June, from 2000 until 2010, Bangladesh experienced steady and strong GDP growth of nearly 6 percent per year on average. Even so, about a third of Bangladeshis live in poverty, and economic hardship is especially prevalent in the rural parts of the country.

Given the country's history, its recent progress and the hurdles remaining, if Bangladesh is to reach its goal of becoming a middle- income country by 2021, the question of governance is central and makes the political standoff that has gripped the country even more tragic and counterproductive. Bangladesh's middle-income aspirations are contingent on a significant rise in GDP growth and a broad reform agenda, neither of which is possible under current conditions.

Fortunately, there is a precedent that could allow for an exit from the impasse through new elections. In February 1996, elections were boycotted by Awami and other opposition parties, and the BNP took nearly all of the seats, touching off a crisis of legitimacy similar to that now gripping Dhaka. Four months later, new elections were held under the auspices of a caretaker government, and the outcome favored Awami.

Now, as then, the time has come for cooler heads to prevail and for a new election to be called that will give all parties the time and space needed to organize and campaign. The recent release of Ms. Zia from house arrest should be followed by the release of others detained for political reasons. There should be a mutual pledge of nonviolence, guarantees of noninterference in political campaigning by police and security forces, and a pledge to respect the people's mandate.

The people of Bangladesh, who have suffered mightily and who have also risen to every challenge over the course of more than four decades, deserve better than to be caught between two stubborn matriarchs. New elections should be scheduled and Bangladeshi voters given a free and fair chance in determining their country's future.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 5, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 6, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, when it was first opened in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the Guantanamo Bay prison may have seemed a reasonable stopgap measure as a shocked Nation marshaled its resources and figured out how to dispose of detainees taken in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

But even in those early days, the problems we were creating with Guantanamo's patchwork of military rules and commissions were readily apparent. Since 2002, I have introduced numerous bills and amendments to try to bring Guantanamo into conformity with American and international law and to stop it from becoming a jihadi recruiting tool.

But reform of this prison system has been elusive and progress towards bringing its detainees to justice almost nonexistent, as U.S. courts have taken strong issue with its improvised legal process.

In one of his first acts as President, Barack Obama ordered the closing of Guantanamo, but the Congress almost immediately stepped in and erected a series of statutory barriers that have prevented the transfer of detainees to the United States and made transfer to third countries extremely difficult.

Today, there is a renewed push by the administration to shutter Guantanamo for good. Doing so will not be easy, but the cost of keeping the prison open--to our values, to our pocketbook, to our reputation, and to our security--have become too great to bear.

There are now 164 detainees at Guantanamo, 84 of whom have been cleared for transfer to their home country or another country willing to accept them. These detainees should be processed and transferred as soon as security considerations will allow.

This would leave 80 remaining detainees, who are roughly split into two groups. The first group, which includes Khalid Sheikh Mohamed and other key 9/11 plotters, consists of detainees slated for trial under the military commissions that were established by the Bush administration.

These proceedings have been mired in pre-trial wrangling; and the longer they drag on, the less legitimate the overall system appears. Meanwhile, our civilian judicial system, which many congressional critics have derided as not up to the task of handling terrorism cases, has disposed of a long line of defendants--from Richard Reid, the Shoe Bomber, to Omar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Underwear Bomber, and Faisal Shaizhad, the Times Square Bomber--all successfully prosecuted in America's civilian courts, and none will ever be released again.

By lifting its restriction on transferring these detainees to the United States for trial, Congress could give the administration the flexibility to transfer many of those now in the military commission system to Article III courts for prosecution. These civilian courts can be more expeditious, more effective, and, in the eyes of the world, more just than military tribunals.

The remaining detainees--some 46 men--will be the most difficult cases. These are detainees considered too dangerous to release or transfer, but who cannot be prosecuted. For some, evidence cannot be presented without revealing critical sources of intelligence and methods. Others were tortured, or evidence against them was collected through torture or some other unlawful means. For still others, the evidence of past acts and future dangerousness, while not sufficient to prosecute, argues compellingly against any release or transfer.

The administration announced over the summer that it would begin a review of these cases, and as a result, others may be cleared for transfer or prosecution. It is likely that many, if not most, of the detainees in this final category will remain in American custody. But where?

Even if we ultimately decide to maintain these detainees in custody, that does not justify continued operation of Guantanamo Bay. Instead, they should be transferred to civilian or military confinement in the United States, an option currently blocked by Congress.

Every day that it remains open, Guantanamo Bay damages the United States. Because there are other, better options for prosecution and detention of these inmates, we are not safer for Guantanamo's existence. In fact, it makes us more vulnerable by drawing new generations to the jihad.

The Congress, the administration, and the military can work together to find a solution that protects our people even as we maintain our principles and devotion to the rule of law. The President has indicated that he would like to work with Congress to end the Guantanamo era. We should take him up on that important challenge.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call on Speaker Boehner to allow passage of the comprehensive immigration reform legislation. It is vital that we approach the issue of immigration with a sense of urgency, a spirit of compassion, and a commitment to security. Most important, reform must provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and allow them to emerge from the shadows.

My congressional office has one of the highest volumes of immigration cases in California, and the stories that are shared with me are heartbreaking. I receive calls from constituents every day describing the hardships that our broken immigration system has placed on their families, and I have heard their pleas for help.

The current wait time for many family members to reunite in the United States can be 10 years or more. DREAMers who came to the United States as young children and are pursuing a college degree or serving in the military have limited or no career opportunities and are stuck in endless limbo.

Our broken immigration system takes a terrible toll on innocent families, local law enforcement, and our economy. We must not further delay action. The time to fix it is now.

Mr. Speaker, as winter descends upon the Middle East, the plight of Syria's people who have endured nearly 3 years of savage civil war grows more desperate with each passing day.

Fighting rages on throughout much of the country, and with the government forces making headway in recent months, many of the rebel groups have splintered, turning on each other. As in wars throughout history, it is civilians, especially children, who have borne much of the suffering.

More than 9 million Syrians are in need of humanitarian assistance, and a quarter of these, 2.2 million, have fled the country, mostly to neighboring Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey. Half of those refugees, more than a million people, are children.

Another 6.5 million Syrians are internally displaced, having fled their homes, but remaining inside the country, often in parts of Syria that have changed hands on multiple occasions and with attendant civilian suffering.

While all of Syria's people have been affected by fighting, it is Christians, who make up about 10 percent of the country's population, who are at greatest risk, given their small numbers and the increasingly religious nature of a war that started out as a broad- based secular movement that sought to change the character of the Syrian regime but not the regime itself.

For two millennia, Syria has been home to one of the oldest Christian communities in the world, a population dominated by the eastern churches, but also including smaller numbers of Catholics and Protestants. Syria's Christians have been comfortably and fully integrated into the economic, political, and cultural life of modern Syria and, despite their small numbers, are well represented among the country's elite. Tragically, this long, peaceful coexistence has been shattered, and half a million Syrian Christians, nearly one in four, have fled the country since the fighting began.

Like minorities the world over, Syrian Christians have tried to avoid getting dragged into the fighting that has gripped their homeland; but with their top two population centers, Aleppo and Homs, having seen some of the most savage fighting in the war, Christians have been unable to avoid being drawn into the conflict.

While the uprising against Syrian President Bashar Assad did not start out as a sectarian conflict, it has increasingly taken on a religious tone, as many of the rebels have wrapped themselves in the mantle of fundamentalist Islam.

Initially, the Free Syrian Army and other large rebel groupings distanced themselves from the more religious rebel factions, some of whom are linked to al Qaeda, but even they have adopted an increasingly Islamist tone in recent months. This has exacerbated the plight of the Christians who are increasingly targeted simply because they are Christian and because they are seen by many Muslims as having backed the government.

The truth is that Syrian Christians, many of whom have family members among my Armenian American constituents, did not rally to the regime. Syrian Christians, like most other Syrians, simply wanted a freer, more open society and a greater voice in their own government. It is a testament to the depth of Christian desperation that

atrocities perpetrated by radical Islamists have done more to test Christian neutrality than the use of chemical weapons and war crimes by the Assad regime.

Ending the Civil War through a negotiated solution represents the best prospect for peace, and the international community must insist that any agreement reached at the upcoming peace talks in Geneva or thereafter will guarantee the safety of Syria's minority populations.

In the meantime, America can do more to help those seeking refuge. That is why I have been working for much of the past year to convince the administration to allow humanitarian parole for the nearly 6,000 Syrians with approved immigrant petitions to the United States.

As hundreds of millions around the world prepare to celebrate the most joyful day of the Christian calendar, the international community must intensify its efforts to end this terrible war, and also to protect Syria's Christians and ensure the continued vitality of this 2,000-year-old community.

Mr. Speaker, for much of the past decade, Iran's nuclear weapons development program has been a top national security concern for the United States. An Iran armed with nuclear weapons, capable of threatening Israel and other regional states, would touch off a nuclear arms race in the world's most volatile region.

For this reason, I have pressed for ever-increasing sanctions to isolate Iran from the global economy and have supported a policy that leaves all options on the table, including military force. The stakes are too high to risk any miscalculation of our resolve by Iran's leaders.

In pushing for ever more punitive sanctions, I have held out the hope that increased economic pressure might force Iran to give up its nuclear weapons ambition and rejoin the community of nations. Now we are at a moment in the standoff with Tehran that will test that assumption.

In repeated statements since his election as Iran's new President in June, Hassan Rouhani expressed interest in exploring a negotiated end to the sanctions in exchange for walking back its nuclear program. While the first Geneva meeting did not lead to a breakthrough on an interim deal, the parties reportedly came close and will be reconvening today for a second round.

Some have called on the Senate to continue work on a new round of sanctions that was passed by the House with my support earlier this year. Advocates of this approach say that sanctions brought us to this point, and increased pressure during the negotiations will improve the likelihood of success at the bargaining table.

I disagree.

President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry have asked for more time to test Iran's willingness to enter into a tough and verifiable agreement, and I think we should give it to them.

I am pleased to see reports that there appears to be a bipartisan agreement in the Senate that we will hold off for now. We will know soon enough if the Iranian regime is serious about a new direction in its nuclear program and in its relationship with the West. If it is not, there will be ample opportunity to tighten the stranglehold on Iran's economy, and further sanctions will have my full support.

Some have warned that any relaxation of sanctions in an interim deal risks unraveling the whole sanctions regime. This is not an illusory concern, and for this reason, any partial lifting of the freeze on Iranian assets must be quickly reversible if the Iranians balk on a final deal; but the absence of an interim deal is also problematic if it means another 6 months of Iranian enrichment. The Iranians must be made to understand that, if they walk away or cheat, the sanctions will be tightened to the point of strangulation--and the international community must be prepared to make good on that threat.

I have no illusions about the character of the Iranian regime; nor do I trust it. I do not believe that we can look into Rouhani's eyes and see the truth, let alone his soul. Even if Rouhani were serious about his intentions, there is no guarantee that Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, would bless any agreement that forces Iran to verifiably foreswear the development of the bomb.

Ultimately, this is not about trust. It is not about making concessions to Iran or awarding the mullahs for thwarting the will of the international community for many years. It is about seizing the opportunity to see whether we can end Iran's nuclear weapons program without resorting to military action; and if we cannot, no doubt it will remain that the United States made every effort to resolve this grave threat diplomatically.

No negotiation is without risk, and the Iranians' track record is cause for great skepticism. The administration must not accept a bad deal, but neither should it be prevented from testing whether it can obtain a good deal that advances our security interests and those of our allies.

Yitzhak Rabin, the former Israeli Prime Minister who signed the Oslo Accords two decades ago, once noted:

You make peace with your enemies, not the Queen of Holland.

I agree and urge us to give diplomacy a chance.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the importance of the Special Diabetes Program, which represents 35 percent of the Federal investment in type 1 diabetes research, and to encourage my colleagues to support a multiyear renewal of the program at current funding levels.

Type 1 diabetes among Americans under the age of 20 rose by 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. People with type 1 diabetes, including one of my constituents, 8-year-old Charlie, need daily finger sticks and insulin injections to stay alive.

As part of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation's ``Promise to Remember Me'' campaign, I recently met with Charlie and his father and another constituent, Nancy, whose 17-year-old daughter also has type 1 diabetes, to discuss their daily struggle with the disease and their hopes for better treatment options and, someday, a cure.

The Special Diabetes Program has delivered groundbreaking research for type 1 diabetes, including artificial pancreas systems, a revolutionary technology in the research pipeline that will automatically control blood sugar levels, keep patients healthier, and help avoid many dangerous and costly long-term complications due to diabetes.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the program.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate The Creative Life (TCL) Chinese Theatre on hosting the Beijing Film Panorama in America Festival and recognizing acclaimed Chinese Film Director, Feng Xiaogang during a Handprint Ceremony.

TCL Chinese Theatre, formerly known as Grauman's Chinese Theatre, has long stood as a tribute to the great men and women of film and television. The iconic signatures, handprints, and footprints in cement that have graced the theater's entrance since the 1920's, are visited by millions of people every year. It is fitting as we witness the growth of Chinese film internationally, that Hollywood celebrates this achievement in the cinematic arts throughout the world.

To mark this auspicious occasion, Feng Xiaogang will be immortalized in cement with a Handprint Ceremony. Mr. Xiaogang is an accomplished Chinese film director whose comedic films have been box office hits in China over the last two decades, and who has recently begun making dramatic period films. As the first Chinese director to receive this honor, Feng Xiaogang will join Cecil B. DeMille, Ron Howard, Steven Spielberg, Gene Kelly and Clint Eastwood, among other great film directors whose handprint impressions remind us of the talent that has brought so many stories to life through film.

I ask all Members to join me in congratulating TCL Chinese Theatre and Mr. Xiaogang upon this historic occasion.