Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I just want to indicate the sheer magnitude of the horror of what is unfolding in Sudan as we speak. Because what is occurring there is a scorched-earth policy that has killed in excess of 70,000 people, that has displaced more than a million of people within Sudan, and forced hundreds of thousands of people over the border into Chad.

When we think of the magnitude of the several hundreds villages burnt to the ground, the irrigation systems that have been systematically destroyed, that the government-backed militias, referred to as Janjaweed, are committing wide-spread rapes and atrocities, that the very people in the NGO communities, the very charitable organizations that are attempting to get in on the ground and to assist in this region are prevented access to those starving, I think when we reflect on what we know we can only imagine as to the extent of the horror in those villages in which we have no access, and to have had the United States, to have this Congress and the administration explain that this is genocide is only a first step.

The question has been how do we get the international community to take action, a concerted action, in order to effectively apply pressure on the government in Khartoum to reverse its actions in supporting the Janjaweed. We have made it clear that we are going to support international criminal courts, we are going to support bringing to justice those that have been found to be involved in this process. But, in the meantime, there is the question of how we negotiate with a United Nations in which that body and the Security Council is not willing to take the steps that the United States has taken to call this genocide, nor to put the types of embargoes that the United States has placed on Sudan. They are not willing to go as far.

In addition to speaking in favor of this resolution, I wanted to speak for just a moment about some of my concerns about the United Nations Security Council resolutions on Sudan. That draft resolution is dated November 18. This resolution is expected to be offered in Nairobi, Kenya. It addresses the issue of the ongoing negotiation, of an attempt to achieve peace in a separate conflict in southern Sudan.

Again, this Congress went on record declaring the killing in Darfur as genocide. This was a historic determination not to be taken lightly. It was a fitting response to the atrocities committed by the Sudanese government and their proxy forces.

For those of us on the floor today, we believe that genocide requires exceptional responses by the United States and the international community. We also believe that these responses should be taken with or without the concurrence by the government of Sudan. So when we look at the draft resolution that the United Nations is working on, we see that they urge bilateral and multilateral donors ``to continue their efforts to prepare for the rapid delivery of an assistance package for the reconstruction and economic development of Sudan, including official development assistance, possible debt relief and trade access to be implemented once a comprehensive peace agreement has been signed and its implementation begins.'' This document expresses hope that this implementation will occur by the end of next month.

Let me just say, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, we should not support such a so-called peace dividend which benefits the government of Sudan merely for signing a peace agreement. We should not be doing that while killing rages in Darfur.

Numerous agreements, including memorandums of intent to sign future agreements, already have been signed, and countless deadlines have long since passed. Rewarding the government of Sudan for just the act of signing another agreement without setting concrete and verifiable benchmarks for implementation would be both foolhardy and unacceptable.

I realize that the administration is operating within the constraints of the Security Council and that the United States has been the leading and most aggressive country in trying to resolve the crisis in Sudan, and I understand that any Security Council resolution is a consensus document. But, nevertheless, those of us involved in policy on the Sudan ask the U.N. to reconsider, to reconsider whether the price of consensus is in this instance too high, and we ask the United Nations Security Council to redouble its efforts to put pressure on the government in Khartoum to end the killing in Darfur and to bring whatever powers we can to that end.

I am heartened by the offer by the African Union, by the Nigerian and the Rwandan troops, to go in on the ground to try to defend the people of Darfur. I would suggest that we ask the Security Council and the African Union to expand that mission and allow them to more aggressively pursue that defense and at the same time we continue our efforts with the heavy-lift capability and our efforts to get that force in place to defend these victims of genocide.

Mr. Speaker, I thank again the author of this resolution.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for yielding me this time.

And I want to commend the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for putting together a comprehensive package of reforms to reinvigorate U.S. diplomacy in our war against Islamist terror.

I think that this comprehensive legislation includes many provisions to

improve our safety, including cracking down on illegal U.S. visas and passports, and it gets the ball rolling towards the use of biometric, tamper-resistant machine-readable passports. Clearly, border security is national security.

I also wanted to speak in opposition to the amendment suggested by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for expedited removal. And I do that because an illegal alien who has been in the United States for less than 5 years under this proposal is subject to expedited removal unless he applies for asylum and shows a credible fear of persecution. Then he is exempted. So this bill addresses that issue.

But what the amendment proposed by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) would do is eliminate the expedited removal provision. The reason we have the provision is that, currently, many of the illegal aliens picked up on the border have to be released, and they have to be released because of lack of detention space. So they are asked to show up to a special hearing, and, of course, 87 percent, as we know, do not show up for that deportation hearing. This bill was crafted to solve the problem. The gentleman from New Jersey's (Chairman Smith's) amendment would prevent that.

Secondly, the Ninth Circuit in California has given asylum to illegal aliens whose home governments believe they are terrorists on the theory that they are being persecuted because of the political beliefs of the terrorist organization. So the provision of the bill provides that if the alien applying for asylum is believed to be a terrorist, the alien has to show that a central reason is persecution for race, gender, political beliefs or religion.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the Crime Victims' Rights Act was included in H.R. 5107, the Justice for All Act. I have long been an advocate of victim's rights. I am the author of the first State anti-stalking law in the country. At the Federal level, I introduced the Interstate Stalking Punishment and Prevention Act, which was signed into law, making it a felony to cross State lines to stalk someone.

As a State senator, I worked to establish rights for crime victims in California's state constitution as author and campaign co-chair of Proposition 115, the Crime Victims/Speedy Trial Initiative. I have been working for the passage of a Federal victims' rights bill for quite sometime. I introduced a victim's rights bill in the House and cosponsored the Chabot bill, included in H.R. 5107.

Because victims' rights vary from State to State, a Federal law would help ensure that all victims have at least a minimum level of rights in the criminal justice process. Our legal system must properly protect the rights of the accused and it should provide similar protection for the rights of victims. The bill establishes enhanced rights and protections for all victims of crime and spells out how these rights are to be enforced. In addition, the bill helps States implement and enforce victim's rights laws and retain their full power to protect victims in the ways most appropriate to local concerns and local needs.

This bill is a positive step forward for crime victims' rights and I look forward to it becoming law.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4011, the North Korea Human Rights Act, of which I am an original cosponsor.

I would like to commend the gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Leach, and thank the leadership for expeditiously bringing this bill to the floor.

Madam Speaker, the House passed this legislation unanimously in July. Last week, the other body passed this bill with minor changes. With its passage today, this important piece of legislation heads to the President's desk.

This legislation has been years in the making. In May 2002, the Asia Subcommittee held the first of our hearings that have focused on the humanitarian plight in North Korea. At this hearing and others, our committee heard testimony from North Korean defectors. As Chairman of the US-Republic of Korea Interparliamentary Exchange, I have led Congressional delegations to Seoul where we have met with defectors lucky enough to escape the regime of Kim Jong Il. Here we heard first- hand accounts of the brutal conditions that face the average North Korean--where the regime apportions and withholds food based on perceived citizen loyalty to Kim Jong Il. These meetings and hearings have helped to lay the foundation for this legislation.

Madam Speaker, much has been made about the best way to approach North Korea, which poses a nuclear threat. I believe that there is a strong consensus to bring about change in North Korea. This legislation makes it clear that human rights conditions in North Korea should remain a key element in future negotiations between the United States, North Korea, and other concerned parties in Northeast Asia.

In order to ensure his survival, Kim Jong Il tries to keep an iron grip on all information in North Korea. U.S. backed Radio Free Asia is working to counter Kim Jong Il's propaganda, bringing objective news to the North Korean people. Surveys indicate that North Korean defectors are listening to RFA's broadcasts. A former North Korean military officer tells the story of one official shouting to another during a policy debate, ``You . . . must listen to [the] radio coming from the outside world! Then you will know that we have been living like frogs in a well! [with blinders on].''

That is why this bill calls for an increase of radio broadcasts into North Korea to twelve hours per day. And because of the problem of access to suitable radios in North Korea, the legislation requests a report detailing the steps the U.S. government is taking to increase the availability of information inside North Korea--including the provision of radios. This should maximize North Koreans access to foreign broadcasts like Radio Free Asia. The stakes couldn't be higher. We are talking about helping to free people and by doing so, improving our security.

This legislation is a responsible initiative to promote human rights, refugee protection, and increased transparency in the delivery of humanitarian aid to the North Korean people. It deserves our support.

Mr. Chairman, I do rise in opposition, and I thought what I might do is simply quote some of the testimony before this Congress, starting with Steve McCraw of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Office of Intelligence, and he says of these cards: ``It is the terrorist threat presented by matricula consular that is most worrisome. The ability of foreign nationals to use the matricula consular to create a well-documented but fictitious identity in the United States provides an opportunity for terrorists to move freely within the United States without triggering name-based watch lists that are disseminated to local police officers.'' Now, that is problem number one.

Problem two, as the FBI says, ``It also allows them to board planes without revealing their true identity.'' Mr. McCraw goes on to say that ``Federal officials have discovered individuals from many different countries in possession of matricula consular cards, and that is because the documents are easy to forge.'' He testified that ``An individual of Middle Eastern descent has also been arrested and was in possession of a matricula consular card.''

What we are doing here, if we pass this amendment, is legalizing a method that would make it easy for terrorists to gain access to our financial system, thereby enabling the next group of terrorists to freely move money around the United States and finance their operations. This flies in the face of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations to strengthen I.D.'s.

I do not know how many of my colleagues sat through the hearings and heard the chairman and cochairman say that instead of permitting the use of new forms of I.D.'s from other countries that are not secure and not verifiable, we should be strengthening our own I.D. and visa systems. We heard the testimony like that from Lee Hamilton, former chairman of our Committee on International Relations, that we should adopt biometric identification systems for everyone who comes into the country. And, frankly, this flies in exactly the opposite direction.

I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I would just like to further quote from the FBI document. ``A September 2002 bust of a document production operation in Washington State illustrated the size of this trade. A huge cache of fake Mexican birth certificates was discovered. It is our belief that the primary reason a market for these birth certificates exists is the demand for fraudulently obtained matricula consular cards. In some locations, when an individual seeking a card is unable to produce any document whatsoever, he will still be issued a card by the Mexican Consular official if the official feels that he filled out the questionnaire and satisfies the official that he is who he purports to be.''

That is another problem. In addition to being vulnerable to fraud, the matricula consular is also vulnerable to forgery. As this FBI agent says, ``There have been several generations of the card and even the newest version can be easily replicated despite its security features. It is our estimate that more than 90 percent of these cards now in circulation are the earlier versions of the cards, which are little more than simple laminated cards without any security features.''

As a result of these problems, as the FBI says, ``There are two major criminal threats posed by the cards and one potential terrorist threat. The first criminal threat stems from the fact that the cards can be a perfect breeder document for establishing a false identity. Such false identities are particularly useful to facilitate the crime of money laundering, as the criminal is able to establish one or more bank accounts under completely fictitious names. Accounts based upon such fraudulent premises greatly hamper money laundering investigations once the criminal activity is discovered.''

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 760) condemning the series of terrorist attacks against the Russian Federation that occurred in late August and early September 2004.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. I would like to begin by thanking the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for their support of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks, the Russian people have suffered greatly from terrorism.

They have seen two airplanes blown out of the sky, killing all on board. They have seen bombs explode in subway tunnels, killing people who were just going home or just going to work. And then they saw the tragedy in a town called Beslan, in southern Russia.

And in Russia the first day of school is known there as ``the day of knowledge.'' For Middle School No. 1 in Beslan, it turned into a day of terror. As students and teachers and parents gathered for that first day, 30 terrorists stormed the school, and they took 1,180 occupants as hostage. They herded the group of children and teachers and parents into the school gymnasium, and they rigged it with explosives. And those who did not obey orders on the spot were executed on that site. And there they sat the hostages in the sweltering gymnasium for 52 hours with no food, with no water. Hostages stripped off their clothes from relief of the heat and did what they could to save themselves and try to stay hydrated.

These attacks were planned in meticulous detail with a cache of weapons and other equipment hidden underneath the school's library wooden floor for weeks before the attack. The terrorists were well trained. They were very well equipped. They possessed gas masks and hand-held radios and specialized weaponry. They even possessed two sentry dogs as expertly trained as the attackers themselves. This attack reflects the tactics used by Islamist terrorist groups around the world, including extensive preparation, simultaneous attacks requiring coordination, and the use of suicide bombers in the attack itself. It was no amateur operation.

The end of the seizure resulted in more than 330 dead, half of them children. Hundreds were wounded, and still more were unaccounted for after the bomb blasts. Children were shot in the back as they tried to escape.

The bombed-out school leaves an unimaginable scene, desks littered with bullet holes, bloody handprints on tiles, body parts of suicide bombers litter the floor and the ceiling of the classroom, and on the chalkboard one can see in the film that the teacher had prepared an arithmetic lesson four plus two equals six.

In Beslan last week, caskets, many of them child-sized, were carried one by one for burial. A patch of land about the size of a football field had to be prepared for more graves because the town's cemetery was not big enough to hold all the bodies.

Mr. Speaker, September 1 is Russia's 9/11. The world has expressed its sympathy for the people of Beslan. At the Russian Embassy here in Washington, D.C., hundreds have lined up to sign condolence books, including Secretary Powell and President Bush. Secretary Powell wrote: ``As a parent, my heart and my prayers go out to those who lost children. The United States stands firmly and with solidarity with Russia in fighting all forms of terrorism. This tragedy will serve to energize our efforts.''

As Americans are now sending their children back to school across the country, this calamity has moved many Americans. Many have commented on the Russian government's response to this war and to its policies in Chechnya and its anti-democratic actions in Chechnya. This deserves debate in appropriate forums. However, one thing is clear: nothing can justify this deliberate targeting of innocent children. The use of children as targets by these trained terrorists is reprehensible. These are children, again, that were specifically targeted. This resolution rightly condemns this establishment.

Mr. Speaker, the unfortunate reality is that today's terrorism knows no borders. This killing has spread and apparently will continue to spread. The children and people of Beslan, Russia, have now joined the people of New York and Bali and Moscow and Karachi and Jerusalem and Madrid and many other places around the globe as victims of international terrorism.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the vice chairman of the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), who will soon travel to Beslan, Russia.

(Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. Speaker, this tragedy brings the world's attention to a region of the globe that has been perhaps overlooked for too long, but it has also spurred debate about the next steps in an escalating conflict that transcends borders.

It should also galvanize debate about the threat that the world faces. As the bipartisan 9/11 Commission states, ``The catastrophic threat at this moment in history is the threat posed by Islamic terrorism, especially the al Qaeda network and its affiliates and its ideology.''

I believe this is what we are seeing in southern Russia. These are not criminals united by happenstance, but by militant Islam, united by ideology, doctrine and practice, its adherence drawn from Africa to Southeast Asia, from the Middle East to the Caucasus.

Al Qaeda's interest in the Caucasus is undisputed. Chechnya's lawless period of independence produced the conditions ripe for fomenting global jihad. Fighters, weapons, cash and ideology, much of it Saudi Wahabism, poured in from abroad.

Like al Qaeda, Chechen fighters have used front charities to secure funds. Benevolence International Foundation, whose assets were blocked by the U.S. Government for supporting al Qaeda, has also been found to support jihadists in Chechnya. In fact, evidence seized from Benevolence International indicates that it spent over 40 percent of its budget on Chechnya.

The bipartisan 9/11 Commission exposes other links, noting that several of the 9/11 hijackers, including Mohammed Atta, were headed to Chechnya to fight against the Russians. Only a chance meeting on that train in Germany with another terrorist caused the group to make the decision to travel to Afghanistan instead.

Several Chechens, including Shamil Basayev, believed to be the master mind of this school attack, received training in Afghan terror camps. Perhaps most telling, Afghanistan's Taliban was the only regime in the world to recognize Chechnya's independence in January of 2000 and to pledge it help in its fight against Russia.

Mr. Speaker, I could go on, but it is important to recognize these facts. It is important to recognize that this is the enemy that faces Russia, that faces the United States and that faces the world.

As I said earlier, many have commented on the Russian government's response to this war, to its policies in Chechnya and its anti- democratic actions. This is a debate we should have, but we should have this debate with a clear understanding of what the Russian people and what we are up against.

I urge the passage of this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Mr. Steven R. Heape, a proud member of the Cherokee Nation. He was born in Long Beach, California on March 25, 1951. His family eventually moved to Fullerton, where Steven graduated from Fullerton Union High School. Steven also attended Fullerton Junior College as a Business Administration Major, while working as a Major Account Representative for Armor Food Company.

His interest in motion picture production eventually led him to produce the film titled, ``Location to Recovery,'' one of the first education docudramas to be released from 16mm film to VHS videotape.

In 1994, Mr. Heape and business partner Chip Ritchie formed Rich- Heape Films, Inc., certified by the Cherokee Nation to focus on the history and preservation of the American Indian culture. Today, Rich- Heape Films is an internationally recognized firm with several award- winning films to its credit. The American Indian Chamber of Commerce awarded it the 2003 American Indian Business of the Year.

In August, Mr. Heape was one of five Native American filmmakers invited to participate in the strategic film and video content planning for the new Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian in Washington, D.C. In March 2004, Mr. Heape began the most challenging project of his career, producing a two-hour PBS documentary on the Indian Removal Act of 1830, better known as the Cherokee Trail of Tears scheduled for release in 2005.

On September 12, Mr. Heape is being recognized by the Little Eagle Free Foundation for his contribution and philanthropy in preserving the languages, history and cultures of Native Americans.

It is only fitting that Mr. Heape is to be commended for his extraordinary efforts to document and preserve Native American culture and the part played in American History.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4011, the North Korea Human Rights Act, of which I am an original cosponsor.

The human rights conditions in North Korea are abysmal. As we know, the North Korean regime apportions and withholds resources based on perceived citizen loyalty to the regime. From 1994 to 1998 at least two million North Koreans perished from starvation and related diseases, while nearly 50 percent of all North Korean children are malnourished to the point that it threatens their physical and mental health.

This dire situation has forced many North Koreans to risk life and limb to flee into China. As many as 300,000 North Korean refugees are hiding in the Chinese countryside. Chinese authorities continue an agreessive crackdown--actively hunting down North Korean refugees and forcibly repatriating them to North Korea. Once returned to North Korea, they fact torture, imprisonment, and even execution.

The International Relations Subcommittee on Asia has held hearings on North Korea's human rights abuses, where we have heard testimony from North Korean defectors. Ms. Lee, a former North Korean party official, described life in a North Korean gulag. She said, ``A prisoner has no right to talk, laugh, sing or look in a mirror. Prisoners must kneel down on the ground and keep their heads down deeply whenever called by a guard. They can say nothing except to answer questions when asked. Prisoners have to work as slaves for up to 18 hours a day. Repeated failure to meet the work quotas means a week's time in a punishment cell. A prisoner must give up their human worth.'' She also told us, with the help of simple--yet shocking--illustrations, about chemical weapons tests and other atrocities that she witnessed which were performed on prisoners.

Unfortunately, this grim reality has been glossed over. This bill is an important statement as to how the United States Congress views the situation in North Korea. It is also the moral policy given the horrendous human rights condition north of the border.

In order to ensure his survival, Kim Jong Il tries to keep an iron grip on all information in North Korea. Control of information is absolutely crucial--because the system is based on lies. The propaganda is so great, that defectors actually report that they believed that their impoverished country was wealthier than South Korea. U.S. backed Radio Free Asia is countering this propaganda, bringing objective news to the North Korean people. Surveys indicate that North Korean defectors are listening to RFA's broadcasts.

That is why this bill calls for the increase of radio broadcasts into North Korea to twelve hours per day. And because of the problem of access to suitable radios in North Korea, the legislation requests a report detailing the steps the U.S. government is taking to increase the availability of information inside North Korea--including the provision of radios--to maximize North Koreans access to foreign broadcasts like Radio Free Asia.

Whatever one's views on how to handle the North Korea challenge, I believe that there is a strong consensus to bring about change in North Korea. Mr. Speaker, as you know, the concept here is to do as we did with Eastern Europe--flooding repressed people with broadcasts from Radio Free Europe. When we talk with Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel, they tell us that the biggest factor in changing attitudes behind the Iron Curtain was the ability to listen to Radio Free Europe's broadcasts.

This legislation is a responsible initiative to promote human rights, refugee protection, and increased transparency in the delivery of humanitarian aid to the North Korean people. It deserves our support.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the sponsor of this resolution, Mr. Payne, as well as Chairman Hyde of the Committee on International Relations, and all of the members who have worked to bring H. Con. Res. 467 to the floor. I think it's very important that Congress act on this resolution before the August recess. Tonight the House of Representatives will go on record declaring the atrocities being committed in the Darfur region of Sudan to be ``genocide.'' H. Con. Res. 467 is a statement for the world, and a stark warning to the Sudanese government.

We've heard about the atrocities government-backed militias are perpetrating in Darfur. This resolution cites an estimated 30,000 innocent civilians brutally murdered, more than 130,000 people fleeing to neighboring Chad, and more than one million people internally displaced. The Africa Subcommittee that I chair has held several hearings on Sudan. We've heard about the human suffering. We have also heard about how this killing is targeted and systematic. Villages are razed, crops are burned, and wells are poisoned. I fully support this resolution's determination that genocide is occurring in Sudan, as it played out in Rwanda ten years ago.

Those doing the killing need to understand that the world is changing. We have international courts to hold human rights criminals accountable. Information is being collected. The days of impunity are ending. That is a message that this resolution sends.

H. Con. Res. 467 deplores the failure of the United Nations Human Rights Commission to take appropriate action on Darfur. Earlier this year, the Commission failed to support a United States led effort to strongly condemn gross human rights violations in Darfur. Others just don't care. The administration has taken the lead in seeking an end to the slaughter in Darfur, and addressing the humanitarian crisis there. Why do we seem to care about Darfur more than African governments? We desperately need African engagement, and outrage, on Darfur. It is Africans who are being slaughtered.

Indeed, the administration deserves much credit for achieving a north-south peace accord in Sudan. It has played a very good hand with the cards it was dealt. Congress has been supportive of these negotiations, including with the Sudan Peace Act. But now we have a genocide in the west of Sudan--in Darfur.

Peace isn't divisible in Sudan. It's a cliche, but in Darfur, Khartoum is showing its true colors. Today, that government is hearing loud and clear that there will be no U.S. aid or improved relations, no support for the peace process, as long as the killing continues in Darfur. Maybe that matters to Khartoum; to be honest, maybe it doesn't, which is a possibility we need to prepare for. That is why H. Con. Res. 467 urges the administration to seriously consider multilateral or even unilateral intervention to stop the genocide should the United Nations Security Council fail to act. I don't think it needs this urging.

The suffering in Darfur is moving the American people. There's an awakening to the horror being afflicted there. Tonight, the House of Representatives is amplifying these concerns for the world.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Viet Nam Human Rights Act, of which I am pleased to have joined the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) in introducing.

I have had the opportunity in Vietnam to sit down with some of the religious dissidents, some of the religious leaders under house arrest for speaking out about religious freedom, and I wanted to share with this body that Freedom House has consistently done an analysis every year on Vietnam and ranked that country ``not free,'' because people there cannot practice religious liberty; and efforts by this House to promote human rights in Vietnam have been blocked.

Meanwhile, I will just give this assessment by Freedom House, the most recent. ``The regime jails or harasses most dissidents, controls all media, sharply restricts religious freedom, and prevents Vietnamese from setting up independent political or independent labor or independent religious groups.''

My colleagues today have pointed out some horrific abuses against those who are simply attempting to practice their religion as they choose, but I want to point out that this regime is also one of the world's worst violators of press and Internet freedom. Prominent nongovernmental organizations have condemned the government of Vietnam's attempt to silence cyberdissidents and stifle freedom of the Internet.

I think the severity of some of these jail terms handed down, last year, we had Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, one of Vietnam's best-known dissidents, who was arrested for sending an email entitled ``Communique on Freedom of Information in Vietnam.'' It was simply an analysis of the government's refusal to implement and lift controls on the media.

I will just take one line out of this analysis that he put forward. He said, ``The State hopes to cling to power by brainwashing the Vietnamese people through stringent censorship and through its absolutist control over what information the public can receive.''

Now, we have a way here, with this bill, with this legislation, to beef up Radio Free Asia and bring information, bring objective news and truth to the Vietnamese people in a more effective way. I think the spread of democratic values in Asia is critical to U.S. security interests, and I think Radio Free Asia is a large step forward in the right direction. We know these broadcasts are effective. How do we know? Because the Vietnamese government spends so much of their energy trying to block these broadcasts.

So I agree we have a growing relationship with Vietnam. I do not take issue with that. I supported the Bilateral Trade Agreement. But this does not mean the United States should stand moot while grievous human rights abuses occur. So I urge my colleagues to send this legislation to the other body with a strong vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 688; and I want to just commend my colleague, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Nunes), for his offering up this amendment.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa of the Committee on International Relations, I can attest to the importance of Portugal engagement not only in Africa on the War on Terror but also, as a member of the Committee on International Relations, we have seen their engagement in Europe and in Southeast Asia. They have been at the vanguard of confronting terrorism and confronting the threats that we in the entire world community have faced post-September 11. They have continued to allow the United States access and use of the Lajes Air Base, and we are deeply appreciative of that but also certainly very appreciative of the friendship that Portugal has shown the United States.

We want to commend the people of Portugal and, at the same time, we also want to recognize in this resolution the many contributions made to our Nation by the Portuguese-American population here in the United States.

As we focus on Iraq, we again also appreciate the Portuguese forces that serve there, the military forces, the medical personnel, the police that have been such an asset to us.

So, with that said, in conclusion, I would like to again thank the government of Portugal and the Portuguese people for their friendship, their support as an ally and also for their leadership in Europe and worldwide. I urge the adoption of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2264) to require a report on the conflict in Uganda, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 2264.

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

We are urging support for S. 2264, the Northern Uganda Crisis Response Act, and we are doing that because for the past 18 years Northern Uganda has been embroiled in a particularly vicious conflict, one which pits Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni's efforts at governance against a group called the Lord's Resistance Army. And the Lord's Resistance Army, designated as a terrorist organization by the Secretary of State, moves in small, well-coordinated groups from bases in southern Sudan, launching brutal attacks against civilian populations. They launch these attacks at night.

Members of the Lord's Resistance Army have no clear political agenda; and, frankly, they make no attempts to hold territory. But what they do do and have done for these last 18 years is to murder and rape and loot with impunity.

The devastation inflicted upon the civilian population during this war cannot be overstated. Frankly, it is unknown how many people have been killed, but we do know that more than 1.2 million people, 80 percent of the local population, have been displaced by the Lord's Resistance Army. Over 1.8 million people depend on food aid in an area that once served as the breadbasket of Uganda, and acute malnutrition of children under the age of 5 has risen 30 percent since December, 2002.

Humanitarian operations have been severely hampered by the increasingly tenuous security situation there in Northern Uganda. Aid convoys regularly come under attack; and, according to the United Nations, they can now only deliver materials under heavy military escort. Up to 90 percent of the schools in affected districts have been closed.

The HIV/AIDS prevalence rate in the Gulu District, a district particularly hard-hit by the crisis, is 30 percent, while the national average is just 5 percent. Many of us are aware of the progress made under President Museveni in fighting HIV/AIDS nationwide in Uganda where it has been reduced.

But not in this district where the Lord's Resistance Army operates at night.

Perhaps the most heart-wrenching aspect of this conflict has been the impact it has had on the children. Up to 20,000 children have been abducted since the start of this conflict. Many have been killed while others have been beaten and tortured and maimed and forced to be soldiers or sexual slaves.

Between 20,000 to 30,000 other children are forced every evening to seek refuge on the streets of Gulu and Pader and Kitgum. They walk up to 15 kilometers from their villages to spend the night sleeping under grossly overcrowded tents on concrete floors, before giving up at dawn to make the return to their village. These children have never known peace. They have never known stability. They have never had the luxury of being a child and experiencing the joys of childhood.

According to Jan Egeland, the United Nations Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, the conflict in northern Uganda ``is characterized by a level of cruelty seldom seen and few conflicts rival it for sheer brutality.'' Given the horrific nature of the crimes perpetrated by the Lord's Resistance Army, I have no doubt that that statement is true. Despite this, the magnitude of the crisis is not well grasped outside of the region, and international response, frankly, has been underwhelming.

The Northern Ugandan Crisis Response Act, this bill, draws much- needed attention to the forgotten war in northern Uganda. It reaffirms the strong relationship which exists between the United States and Uganda while recognizing that the government of Uganda's military efforts to resolve the conflict have not effectively ensured the security of civilian populations.

The bill calls on the government of Uganda to improve the level of professionalism within the Ugandan People's Defense Force and to permit international human rights monitors to establish a presence in northern and eastern Uganda.

The bill acknowledges that, according to Human Rights Watch, the government of Sudan has been the only known supporter of the Lord's Resistance Army since the early 1990s. To this end, it calls on the administration to investigate the sources of support for the Lord's Resistance Army and to make it clear to the government of Sudan that normalization of relations will not be possible if credible evidence against these sources again emerges.

S. 2264 asserts that the United States should work vigorously to support peace initiatives in northern Uganda. It urges the United States Government, the international community, and the government of Uganda to make resources available to meet immediate relief and development needs and to provide civilian protection and to develop reintegration plans for displaced persons to integrate them back into society, and for combatants and for abductees and to provide support in general for civil society.

Finally, the bill requires the Secretary of State to submit a report to the Congress which describes not only the sources of support for the Lord's Resistance Army but also the activities undertaken by the Lord's Resistance Army which obstruct humanitarian assistance, the practices employed by the UPDF to ensure civilian protection, and to punish soldiers who are themselves guilty of abuse, and the actions taken by the Ugandan government, the United States and the international community to ensure civilian protection.

This bill is the result of a collaborative effort and enjoys strong bipartisan, bicameral support; and we thank the gentleman from Wisconsin in the Senate, Mr. Feingold, for introducing this timely and important measure; and here on the House floor, we urge full support.

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

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

The conflict in northern Uganda does not receive much attention in the press; and, frankly, it does not receive the attention it deserves.

Today, the U.S. Congress is speaking out, going on record in saying that we have an interest in helping to stop the savagery that is devastating so many lives.

I want to just take a moment and thank my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for his support on this resolution, but wider than that, for his leadership on so many of the most vexing and troublesome of gross human rights violations around the world which he has consistently brought to the world's attention.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 704, which is legislation that I introduced. And this legislation congratulates my alma mater, the Cal State Fullerton Titans baseball team, on winning the 2004 College World Series. I am pleased that my colleagues from Orange County have joined me in acknowledging this triumphant season for the Titans.

For those of us who grew up in Orange County, this is a momentous occasion. This is the fourth time in the school's history that the Titans have won the College World Series championship.

The Titans' victory was far from predicted. They were the underdog from the start. They started this season with a 15-16 won-loss record at midseason. Despite their early struggles, the Titans continued to display character and resiliency by working hard. This scrappy Cal State-Fullerton baseball team went on to beat the odds and did so in the most humble fashion possible, through good old-fashioned teamwork.

Cal State-Fullerton went on to win the Big West Conference over perennial conference powerhouse Long Beach State. This contentious conference is hard fought year after year, with the Titans always displaying consistency and determination, although favorable results are not always the outcome. However, this season, as in some seasons past, the Titans emerged victorious alongside their passionate coach George Horton, who sees every opportunity as one in which positive results may rise.

The Titans continued their inspiring display of teamwork and will to win throughout the College World Series. They defeated the University of Miami Hurricanes and then the University of South Carolina Gamecocks in the semifinals. This run of the Titans culminated with their sweep of the best-of-three championship series by defeating the top-ranked University of Texas Longhorns 6-4 and 3-2 in come-from-behind victories.

The Cal State-Fullerton Titans finished with an overall record of 47 wins and 22 losses and a postseason record of 11 wins and 2 losses. This victory for Cal State-Fullerton head coach George Horton was bittersweet as he defeated his longtime mentor and friend Augie Garrido who led the Titans in the past for 21 seasons during which he won three national championships before leaving to coach the University of Texas Longhorns back in 1996.

The atmosphere at both the stadium in Omaha, Nebraska, and back home in Orange County was electrifying. Fans across Orange County displayed their Titan pride in waves by wearing Cal State-Fullerton colors identified by the distinguishable orange and blue.

The Titans were welcomed home by an enthusiastic crowd of supporters upon their arrival in Orange County where a parade took place in honor of these exceptional college athletes.

Throughout the season, the Titans were led by a gutsy group of players such as All-Americans Kurt Suzuki, who hit a single with two outs in the bottom of the seventh inning driving home the game-winning run in the final game of the series, and Jason Windsor, who pitched his second complete game of the College World Series, earning him Most Outstanding Player honors as they captured the NCAA Division I baseball championship.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Cal State-Fullerton Titans' players, coaches, staff and fans who were instrumental in bringing the College World Series championship back to Fullerton for a fourth time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to join my colleagues in honoring Doug Bereuter and commending the 13 terms he has served in the House of Representatives. I have had the privilege of working with Congressman Bereuter on the Financial Services Committee and the International Relations Committee for a number of years now. As we have heard today, he is a highly esteemed and respected member of these committees.

Congressman Bereuter has been one of the House's resident experts on foreign policy matters--especially in Asia. I had the privilege of serving on the Asia Subcommittee when Congressman Bereuter served as its Chairman and worked with him to strengthen U.S. ties with our allies in Asia. Congressman Bereuter and I also had a chance to travel to Asia together during this time.

As this House knows, Congressman Bereuter's interest in foreign affairs has not been confined to Asian nations. He plays an active role in European parliamentary exchanges and serves as Chairman of the European Subcommittee with distinction. As President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Congressman Bereuter has highlighted the importance of establishing strong transatlantic relationships and the role of sustained and meaningful dialogue between the United States and Europe in achieving those goals. He worked diligently to include nations like Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Congressman Bereuter and I have been encouraging greater involvement by NATO partners in promoting security in Afghanistan.

Congressman Bereuter has also proved himself to be an expert on intelligence matters. As Chairman of the Intelligence Policy and National Security Subcommittee and Vice Chairman of the Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee, he has led careful oversight of the transformation of U.S. intelligence agencies after September 11th. He has worked hard to improve the organization and operation of the intelligence community, enhance their language education and training, and improve the coordination of the Federal Government in identifying and responding to weak or failing countries that endanger international security or stability.

I have long respected Doug's thoughtful and attentive manner and his focus on substance rather than rhetoric. When he spoke, people listened. This House will undoubtedly miss his presence and work.

Mr. Speaker, as an original sponsor of this legislation, I have welcomed working with the gentleman from California (Chairman Thomas) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), ranking member; the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott); the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson); the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane); the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), and other Members from both sides of the aisle who have been advancing the AGOA program for years now.

Since becoming chairman of the Africa Subcommittee 7 years ago, one of our top priorities has been working to see that Africa does not fall off the edge of the world's economic map; and, frankly, Africa is teetering on that edge. Fortunately, though, AGOA has been a lifeline for Africa to the global economy.

Today, 3 years into the AGOA program, we know that it has worked. Many of us that have worked on this legislation, of course, wish that more African countries and more African industries were taking advantage of AGOA, and we wish they particularly would take advantage of AGOA in agriculture. That is why this legislation includes trade capacity-building provisions, but in a few short years AGOA has managed to draw hundreds of millions of dollars of foreign investment to the continent, creating hundreds of thousands of desperately needed jobs. This makes AGOA the most effective of our development programs for Africa that I am aware of.

Several Members, in fact, have had the opportunity to visit these apparel plants as we have traveled to Africa to see this encouraging development firsthand. Africans are meeting world-class standards for manufactured goods. This makes AGOA a big morale boost for many African countries. AGOA has also encouraged difficult economic reforms as African countries have strived to maintain their eligibility for AGOA.

AGOA has also bolstered our political relations with many African governments. Few African officials that I have met with have not expressed their support and appreciation for AGOA. They almost always begin the meeting by explaining how it has brought economic reform to their country and increased trade with the United States. This is important diplomatic capital that our country has gained through AGOA.

The African continent, frankly, is at a crossroads. The vision many of us have is of an Africa that joins the world economy, the vision that we have had of working for an increasingly stable and democratic Africa that is combating HIV/AIDS and exporting and importing more goods and services, including from America. That is the vision that we share, I think, on this floor.

The other very different path Africa could get stuck on leads to even greater poverty and greater hunger and conflict and, frankly, greater disease and environmental degradation. It is unclear which way Africa is headed. Challenges on the continent are immense. But what is quite clear is that our growing security and economic interests on the continent would suffer greatly should Africa find itself on the downward path.

If the U.S. Congress fails to pass this AGOA legislation before the third country fabric provisions expire in September, as we have heard today, if we fail to extend it for 3 years, we will be undoing much of the good that AGOA has done. Greater competition from China and other countries is coming soon, as apparel trading rules are set to change. Unless we act, this competition will surely wipe out much of Africa's young apparel industry and many African jobs that AGOA has created, and, frankly, it will wipe out much African hope. Already apparel orders for Africa are being canceled because of the uncertainty over Congress' action. We must act. Our credibility as a Nation that takes an interest in the world's poorest countries is on the line. Let us act and do our part to direct Africa away from a path of despair.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4103. I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the other Members that have worked with the gentleman from California (Chairman Thomas) to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

I was going to make the point that under AGOA, and there are 37 countries that have qualified for the African Growth and Opportunity Act, this act is supported in fact by all the governments of Africa. We have heard from their diplomatic corps. We have heard that increased trade from Africa as a result of this act, drastically increased trade, has been a win for Africa and has been a win for the United States.

But I did want to clarify one point. There have been no countries that have been dropped from this list because of water issues or questions about privatization of water, and there certainly have been no countries dropped because of intellectual property rights issues.

The one case of a country that was dropped from eligibility for AGOA is the case of Eritrea. In this particular instance, it goes to the issue of human rights, and human rights, because this is a unilateral trade preference granted these governments, there is an expectation that they will conform to worldwide, accepted practices.

Now, this is not just an issue with the United States; this is an issue worldwide. I would just take, for example, the case of Aster Yohannes, who was studying here in the United States. She went back to see her children in Eritrea and was arrested at the airport. Before making that trip, she checked with the ambassador from Eritrea, she was given assurances she could safely go back to her country. She checked with me and I talked with the ambassador, and in writing I was given this assurance. This is not just, as I say, an issue with the United States, these human rights abuses. They are worldwide, because the entire press corps has been arrested in Eritrea, the political opposition has been arrested.

So under these particular circumstances, it is not just the U.S., but the world community, that has launched a campaign to try to have

some reform in Eritrea, and this is why it is not on the list. I thought it would be good to take a moment to explain that, and also explain that it does not go to the issue of national security inside Eritrea, it goes to human rights.

The last point I just wanted to make is that many of these apparel jobs in Africa will otherwise go to China if we do not follow forward and extend AGOA, the provision for third country fabric in AGOA. I think all of the Members here understand how important this particular program of AGOA has been to the continent, and would like to move forward. So I urge passage of this legislation.