Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res 274) commending the National Endowment for Democracy for its contributions to democratic development around the world on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the National Endowment for Democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 274.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution commending the National Endowment for Democracy. I am a sponsor of this measure, and I appreciate the strong support expressed on a bipartisan basis for this measure. I appreciate the numerous cosponsors, and I would like to thank the chairman of the House Committee on International Relations, the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), for introducing the original resolution.

Madam Speaker, this resolution recognizes the National Endowment for Democracy for its work, which has served to strengthen democracies and give hope to many who are shaping a system of governance in their countries that is based on the free participation of the people. Furthermore, the measure expresses the Congress's commendation of 20 years of working to build grassroots institutions and establishing electoral systems, building political parties and opening opportunities for broad-based governance.

During the years of the Cold War, various groups and various individuals were seeking a creative way to support democracy. And as a result of this, it led to President Reagan giving a speech in 1983. In that speech, he proposed an initiative, in his words, ``to foster the infrastructure of democracy, the system of a free press, unions, political parties, universities, which allows a people to choose their own way, to develop their own culture, to reconcile their own differences through peaceful means.''

Those were Reagan's words at the time. He noted that the American Political Foundation would soon begin a study ``to determine how the U.S. can best contribute as a Nation to the global campaign for democracy now gathering force.''

Well, soon thereafter, the National Endowment for Democracy was created as a nongovernmental organization that is supported by annual appropriations and subject to congressional oversight. The ideas that spurred the creation of the NED, as we call it, is that U.S. assistance on behalf of democracy efforts around the world would be good for the U.S. and would be good for those struggling for freedom and for self- government. And that is still true today.

Their success is captured in their mission statements, and the NED's mission statement says that the Endowment is ``guided by the belief that freedom is a universal human aspiration that can be realized through the development of democratic institutions, procedures and values.'' Democracies cannot be achieved through a single election and need not be based upon the model of the U.S. or any other particular country. Rather, it evolves according to the needs and traditions of diverse political cultures. By supporting this process, the endowment helps strengthen the bond between indigenous, democratic movements abroad and the people of the U.S., a bond based on a common commitment to representative government and a common commitment to freedom as a way of life.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I think we all want to congratulate the National Endowment for Democracy for the last 20 years of service, and I think we all wish NED continued success. I think the ranking member of the Committee on International Relations well summed up the values and successes of the NED. I urge my colleagues to support House Concurrent Resolution 274.

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

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2264) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to carry out the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP) program, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2264.

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

This bill, H.R. 2264, authorizes the administration's Congo Basin Forest Partnership. It is authored by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), who is an international conservation leader. I am a cosponsor of this measure, and I think the importance of it is that the tropical forests of central Africa's Congo Basin are a key economic resource for an estimated 20 million people, and these forests play a very critical role in sustaining the environment.

The Congo Basin contains the most diverse grouping of plants and animals in all of Africa, including many rare and endangered species. These plants and animals are invaluable for so many reasons, including their genetic and biological information which could spark technical advances in medicine and agriculture.

This is all threatened, though, as Congo Basin forests are coming under growing pressure. Ten years ago, these forests were virtually untouched. Today, logging operations are shrinking these forests. As a matter of fact, logging operations are taking out the Congo Basin forest at the rate of twice the size of Rhode Island every year. Meanwhile, the construction of logging roads is putting intense hunting pressure on wildlife. At current levels, because of poaching, most species of apes, large antelope, and elephants will disappear from the Congo Basin, as well as the white rhino, and some will become extinct.

Last September, Secretary of State Powell launched the Congo Basin Forest Partnership in Johannesburg. This partnership is focused on 11 key landscapes in 6 different countries. It aims to support a network of national parks and protected areas and well-managed forestry concessions. The partnership is working to combat illegal logging and illegal poaching and other unsustainable practices and to give local populations an economic stake in the preservation of the forests, including through the development of ecotourism. This is a true partnership, with European and other countries making financial contributions to it.

I should note that the most dramatic move toward conserving Congo Basin forests has been taken by Gabon. Last year, President Omar Bongo announced the creation of 13 separate national parks in his country. Previously, Gabon had no national parks system. With this partnership, there is a real African buy-in.

The Subcommittee on Africa that I chair held a hearing on this initiative in March. Testifying before us was world-renowned ecologist Michael Fay. Michael has traveled many of Africa's forests, especially in the Congo Basin, and has had several of his treks covered by National Geographic. I am pleased that the House is acting today to pass this bill. It supports conservation efforts by him and others which have come, in Michael's case, at great personal sacrifice.

Conservation is not easy. What Americans take for granted, Yosemite, Yellowstone and our magnificent national park system, took great foresight. It took a great political commitment to make that a reality. We led the world in the United States. It will be a major challenge to establish and maintain effective regimes to control logging and to control hunting in the Congo Basin; but with the partnership, the U.S. is bringing its unique experience and talents to these efforts.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle), who has traveled to sub-Saharan Africa to see how Africans can better protect their endangered species.

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

In closing, unfortunately, Africa is not the only continent under attack.

Increasingly, we are seeing the link between resource exploitation and human rights abuses and conflict and corruption. This past weekend, the Financial Times previewed a new report to be released next week by Global Witness. The report details how the ruling military junta in Burma is using logging concessions to help maintain its grip on power. In Burma's environmentally-damaging resource diplomacy, Chinese logging companies are granted concessions to large sections of Burmese virgin forest in exchange for political loyalty and in exchange for material support.

In light of this sort of activity, the Congo Basin Forest Partnership and similar initiatives are all that much more important, and I want to thank Members in this body for what they are attempting to do in passing this legislation and urge the support of every Member.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Tyler Matthew Pinchot, a 23-year veteran of the Buena Park Police Department.

He was a motorcycle officer and on June 13, 2003, Mr. Pinchot was struck by a car from behind, during a traffic pursuit. His condition had deteriorated rapidly recently, and on Sunday, September 21, he passed away.

Mr. Pinchot was raised in Garden Grove and Orange, and graduated from Golden West College's police program in 1979. Mr. Pinchot won the Officer of the Year Award two years in a row, in 1991 and 1992. He also was a Special Weapons and Tactics team member, Explorer Post adviser, station-house Santa Claus, unofficial department photographer and a tactical officer at Fullerton College's police reserve academy.

It is through the hard work of law enforcement officers like Mr. Pinchot that our communities stay safe and secure. I am honored to join with my colleagues today in paying tribute to one of California's finest.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am offering this amendment today on behalf of myself and on behalf of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi). We are doing this to correct some of the serious problems with the furnisher liability provision that was offered by the committee's ranking member during the full committee markup. That particular provision penalizes businesses who voluntarily provide the information that makes our credit system work. The provision also turns the existing system for correcting errors on its head with little evidence that it will do anything to increase the accuracy of that system. As the director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection recently said, and I will quote these remarks, ``We don't want to discourage voluntary reporting. Imposing too many obligations on the furnishers could have that effect.''

As our chairman will recall, I believe, I along with several other members of the committee raised these concerns about what we perceived as these serious flaws. We were told by the other side of the aisle that each of these problems we raised would be addressed before consideration on the House floor. Unfortunately, we have not yet found common ground. I am hopeful that we yet will; but the amendment that I have filed here seeks to resolve the following key problems, and I want to state these problems again so that we can focus on them.

First, the furnisher liability provision would allow the current system to be circumvented, thereby flooding small- and medium-sized credit grantors with unnecessary investigations; second, that provision in the bill opens the door for credit repair clinics to subvert the existing system by overwhelming furnishers who are ill prepared to address these tactics. By overwhelming, we mean sending in tens of thousands at one time. Last, that provision effectively doubles the number of reinvestigations businesses would have to handle by encouraging consumers to file in two different places at the same time, because they would file both with the furnisher and they would file with the credit bureau. In short, the provision would drive many furnishers out of the voluntary system. That would reduce the integrity and accuracy of our system.

The current dispute resolution system resolves the overwhelming majority of disputes. It is only the very small number of unusual problems that need specialized attention. Our amendment that we are offering here preserves the existing system that works for so many consumers today, but provides a new right for those infrequent instances where the current system may not be sufficient. In short, our amendment requires individuals to use the current investigation and reinvestigation process through the bureaus. If the dispute is not resolved, it would then allow individuals to take their credit bureau dispute directly to the furnisher, and it compels the furnisher to address it within 30 days under a threat of liability. I think this approach addresses each of the concerns raised in the markup while providing a new dispute resolution process for those individuals who are not served through the current system.

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

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I look forward to trying to work out a satisfactory compromise on this.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

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

I very much appreciate the support from the gentleman from Virginia. I appreciate the offer from the ranking member to work toward a resolution of this. In the spirit of cooperation, I am going to withdraw this amendment. However, Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask for your commitment that you will continue to work with me to ensure that these problems are resolved before a final conference report comes back to the House.

I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Offered By: Mr. Royce

Amendment No. 11: Page 34, strike line 9 and all that

follows through line 18, and insert the following new

subparagraph:

``(A) In general.--A consumer may dispute directly with a

person the accuracy of information that is contained in a

consumer report on the consumer prepared by a consumer

reporting agency described in section 603(p), if--

``(i) the information was provided by the person to that

consumer reporting agency in accordance with paragraph

(1)(B);

``(ii) the consumer has disputed the accuracy of such

information with the consumer reporting agency that prepared

the consumer report pursuant to section 611;

``(iii) the consumer has received the results of the

investigation from the consumer reporting agency and has

requested that the consumer reporting agency reinvestigate

the results in accordance with section 611; and

``(iv) the results of the consumer reporting agency's

reinvestigation requested pursuant to (iii), as reported to

the consumer, do not resolve the dispute.

Page 35, beginning on line 25, strike ``thereafter report

correct information to'' and insert ``notify''.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment, and I am going to repeat a point which the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) has already made and that is yes, the President has repeatedly said $15 billion over 5 years, but he has also made the point repeatedly that the first year of that program as we ramp up will be $2 billion, and that is what is in this bill.

Let me make another point. As we throw around the argument in this Chamber that we will have only three countries qualified for the Millennium Challenge Account, I am reminded that initially in the argument over the African Growth and Opportunity Act there was the argument that not that many countries would qualify. If we look at the results, there are either 38 or 39 countries today that qualify under the African Growth and Opportunity Act out of those 48 sub-Saharan African governments. So what we have seen is a reform, a series of reforms. We have seen more and more countries qualify as we move forward. So I do not think we should assume coming out of the gate that because an NGO argues we think it is only going to be three that that is necessarily the case. I do not believe that.

I appreciate the gentlewoman's intent with this amendment. I chair the Subcommittee on Africa, and I think she and others are right. I think HIV/AIDS is ravaging many parts of the African continent, and I have seen its devastating impact there, and I think this pandemic is starting to ravage other regions of the world as well. So HIV/AIDS is a great challenge for Africa and is a great challenge for the world.

As the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) has noted, the House has provided over $2 billion this year for fighting HIV/AIDS and related diseases and we will ramp up in that commitment over the next few years, and this is more than we have ever provided before, as it should be.

But we need to be clear on another point. HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs are not done in a vacuum. Other efforts to combat HIV/AIDS cannot be effective if African and other developing countries do not have roads or electricity or if family members do not have jobs, if poverty remains widespread. So we need to use our limited resources to combat HIV/AIDS and to promote economic development, and our approach to Africa and the developing world must be comprehensive. Africa's many problems are, in fact, interrelated.

The Millennium Challenge Account is the most innovative approach to development aid in years. Its approach of identifying and aiding those countries committed to economic development promises to ensure that our resources actually make a difference in promoting development in Africa and elsewhere and it promises to help create the conditions that allow for a more effective attack on HIV/AIDS.

Last week the House passed legislation authorizing $1.3 billion for the Millennium Challenge Account for the upcoming fiscal year. That bill won strong bipartisan support. The bill that we are considering today appropriates $800 million. If we are serious about the Millennium Challenge Account, if we are serious about the most innovative approach to development aid in years, we should go no lower with its appropriation level. Those of my colleagues skeptical of development aid, and the track record for many development aid programs is not good, should view the Millennium Challenge Account as a critical undertaking. It promises to revolutionize the business of development aid. By defeating this amendment, we are supporting a promising departure from the past, and I ask my colleagues to defeat this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I had intended to offer an amendment dealing with Afghanistan. Last year the overwhelming majority of the House voted to establish a single fund to carry out a wide variety of vitally needed programs in Afghanistan when it passed the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act of 2002. That act was eventually passed on a Senate vehicle, but was very close to what we passed here with a margin of 390 to 22.

The intention was to appoint a strong administrator who would carry out programs unencumbered by the need to draw funds from and conform to every particle of the complex legal and regulatory framework of the many parts of the foreign assistance acts that need to be brought to bear on the problem of rebuilding Afghanistan.

Over time, the situation has continued to be grave. Our achievements in Afghanistan are in danger of being overturned and our sacrifices in Afghanistan are in danger of having been made in vain. The bill before us, hopefully, requires that $600 million from titles II and III be spent in Afghanistan, and those funds have been identified in broad terms by the administration. The committee has done an excellent job in this bill in general and in providing funds for Afghanistan in particular, and I salute the chairman and the committee for this achievement.

The problem is that funding under the mechanism contemplated in the bill does not take advantage of the new mechanisms provided by Congress last year. This funding cannot be as flexible and is subject to the guidance of a single administrator as it could be if it were provided in a single account.

The current coordinator, Ambassador Taylor, has experience in using this sort of account when he was Coordinator for Assistance for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. We did not know that Ambassador Taylor was going to be appointed to this position when last year's bill was drafted, but we certainly need to give him the flexibility and the overall responsibility he had for this new and very difficult job he has assumed.

The President did not sign the Afghanistan Freedom Support Act until December of 2002, and it is understandable that the administration did not establish the account in its 2003 budget and that the committee followed the administration's guidance in framing this bill.

But it is many months later and things are not going well in Afghanistan. Let us spend the $600 million the right way, if we can.

At this time I submit for the Record the text of the amendment I was considering offering.

Amendment to H.R. 2800, as Reported

Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, I am pleased to accept the gentleman's assurance that he will work to have this account funded, and I am sure that he will do so. I will do everything I can to help make that happen.

Offered By: Mr. Royce

Amendment No. 19: Page 122, after line 2, insert the

following:

Assistance for Afghanistan

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 194) regarding the importance of international efforts to abolish slavery and other human rights abuses in the Sudan, as amended.

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 this resolution under consideration.

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

To start, I would like to commend the author of this resolution, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano), and I would like to commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), the ranking member of the Africa Subcommittee. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) is also one of the original co-sponsors of this resolution, and they are a few of the many Members who have worked diligently to keep attention on the human rights situation in Sudan.

The conflict in Sudan, pitting the National Islamic Front Government against armed forces in the south struggling for political autonomy and with religious freedom has brought incomprehensible suffering to the people of Sudan. The numbers are truly staggering. There have been over 2 million Sudanese who have died over the past 2 decades alone due to war-related causes. Twice that number have been displaced.

In March of 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell told the Committee on International Relations ``. . . there is perhaps no greater tragedy on the face of the Earth today than the tragedy that is unfolding in the Sudan.'' Those were the words of our Secretary of State.

It is the Sudanese government that bears most all of the responsibility for this human rights disaster. Khartoum has long been responsible for marauding militias with notorious human rights abuses against southerners, including taking slaves and forcing conversions to Islam. These and other human rights abuses including blocking emergency food deliveries have rightly earned the Sudanese government widespread condemnation for these acts. In appointing former Senator John Danforth as his special envoy to Sudan in 2001, President Bush said, ``For nearly 2 decades, the government of Sudan has waged a brutal and shameful war against its own people. And this is not right and this must stop.'' Such condemnation was also made by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights until this year.

The Commission had classified Sudan as an ``Item 9'' country, denoting its grave human rights problems. This brought needed international attention to these abuses primarily through the appointment and work of a Special Rapporteur to Sudan who was doing valuable human rights reporting on the ground in Sudan. Yet in April, the members of the commission representing individual countries in a 26 to 24 vote made the incomprehensible decision to end this status for Sudan. This was done despite the Special Rapporteur's judgment that the dire human rights situation in Sudan had not significantly improved and all the violations that respected human rights organizations have reported. This decision mars the commission, and it needs to be reversed.

House Resolution 194 states that ``human rights abuses and slavery in

Sudan remain a matter of the most profound concern'' and that ``the United States must work to reclassify Sudan as an `Item 9' country, requiring a Special Rapporteur at the next session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights.'' And this is the honest thing to do. It is also the just thing to do. It is the right thing to do in defense of victimized Sudanese who are suffering, and it is the right thing to do in memory of those who have perished. Designating Sudan a human rights special case is also a constructive step in support of the peace process in Sudan. We gain nothing by being blind to human rights abuses in Sudan.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

The Sudan peace process is, frankly, entering a very critical period. Some have described the next few months as the end game. There are elements in the government of Sudan who appear to desire peace. General Lazaro Sumbeiywo, the Kenyan mediator, has optimistically announced that he expects to have a peace deal by mid-August.

One thing is sure, though. If peace is to have a chance in Sudan, the U.S. and others will have to aggressively monitor any peace agreement, including paying close attention to human rights conditions. Should a peace agreement be struck, the Special Rapporteur would have an important role to play in ensuring that the new government respects the rights of all Sudanese. There is no reason in the world for the Special Rapporteur to be sidelined now. This resolution says Sudan is a human rights case that demands an international human rights spotlight.

It is critical that all parties in Sudan, especially the government, understand that there will be consequences for those who shun peace and perpetuate human rights abuses in Sudan. The Sudan Peace Act, signed into law last year, provides for such consequences.

Today, the House of Representatives is going on record with another stern warning that slavery and other gross human rights abuses in Sudan are intolerable and that the U.S. is watching. That is the message of this resolution which I urge my colleagues to support.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 80) expressing the sense of Congress relating to efforts of the Peace Parks Foundation in the Republic of South Africa to facilitate the establishment and development of transfrontier conservation efforts in southern Africa.

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 the concurrent resolution under consideration.

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

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), with the support of several members of the Subcommittee on Africa, including the vice chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton) and myself, introduced House Concurrent Resolution 80 supporting the efforts of the Peace Parks Foundation in the Republic of South Africa.

The Peace Parks Foundation, a nonprofit organization, helps with the establishment and development of transfrontier conservation areas among two or more of the southern African development community countries. The idea for the Peace Parks Foundation came about when it was realized that ecotourism has benefited South Africa but has not benefited its neighboring countries, including Mozambique.

The purpose of the Peace Parks Foundation is to better allow wildlife to move freely across national borders, which wildlife is wont to do, which will promote biodiversity, economic development, and peaceful cooperation between all countries involved. By giving local populations an economic incentive to protect the environment, wildlife poaching and other unsustainable practices should decrease.

The Peace Parks Foundation enjoys the full support of all SADC countries and all of their heads of state and is currently developing 232,000 square miles of conservation area between them. This resolution expresses U.S. support for these efforts and encourages nongovernmental organizations and foundations in the United States to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. BOEHLERT), the prime sponsor of this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, earlier this year the Africa subcommittee that I chair held a hearing on the Congo Basin Foreign Partnership, and this is an innovative international approach to the conservation of forests and wildlife in Central Africa.

This plan was first unveiled by our Secretary of State Powell last fall, and the initiative is designed to combat illegal logging through better forest management and local economic empowerment. Of course, these forests play a critical role in sustaining the environment. They absorb carbon dioxide, they cleanse the water, they hold the soil. Their plants and animals are invaluable for so many reasons, including their genetic and biochemical information, which could spark advances in medical, agricultural, and industrial technology.

Ten years ago, those forests in Africa were virtually untouched. Today, logging operations are shrinking these forests. One estimate has logging taking out Congo basin forest area at a rate of twice the size of Rhode Island each and every year. If current deforestation and wildlife depletion rates are not reversed world wide, the world will pay an incalculable environmental and social price and incalculable cultural price as well. This is the beginning of real commitment to conservation in Africa. That is what we are seeing with the Peace Parks Foundation, which deserves our support and deserves our encouragement. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 371 I was in a meeting at the White House with the President. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 372, I was in a meeting at the White House with the President. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Chairman, firstly I would like to recognize the commendable spirit of the amendment because there are many countries throughout the world, many, where we have key interests that could use Millennium Challenge Account aid. But my concern is that this amendment by opening the door to so many middle-income countries, as the chairman said earlier, countries like Russia, countries like Turkey could actually qualify under that amendment, that would stretch the funds at the expense of the most impoverished, mainly in Africa.

I serve as chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa. While the Millennium Challenge Account is rightly focused on developing countries in Latin America and in Asia too, we need to be aware that Africa is a continent in profound crisis. And while we have seen some positive developments, there is no getting around the fact that war and poverty and environmental degradation and so many other ills are devastating many African countries. Africa is the most impoverished continent in the world. It is the most economically marginalized continent in the world. With some 15 percent of the world's population, Africa does 1 percent of the world's trade. Many African countries stand on the precipice of political, economic, health, and humanitarian disaster. In traveling through the continent last week, President Bush championed the Millennium Challenge Account as one means of our engagement with Africa. My concern is that this amendment would lessen the Millennium Challenge Account's impact on this continent where we do have so many key interests. It is for that reason that I oppose this particular amendment, but I certainly support the underlying Hyde-Lantos amendment to expand the Peace Corps and to establish the Millennium Challenge Account.

I have had the chance to meet with Peace Corps volunteers serving in Africa, extraordinary men and women, many of whom work in challenging circumstances. President Bush has offered a bold vision to significantly expand the Peace Corps. This Hyde-Lantos underlying amendment gives the President what he needs to make this vision a reality. Under the leadership of Director Gaddi Vasquez, the Peace Corps is well poised to address the rapidly evolving challenges of the developing world. Also, the Hyde-Lantos amendment contains a provision that I offered in committee expressing the sense that the Peace Corps should return to Sierra Leone as soon as security conditions permit. Sierra Leone, which was so bleak a few years ago, is now making real strides in recovering from a horrific war. The mayhem spread by the Revolutionary United Front with the Liberian warlord Charles Taylor as the sponsor for that organization thankfully has come to an end.

Mr. Chairman, because of this brutal conflict, the Peace Corps was forced to terminate its program in Sierra Leone in 1994, after a long tradition of service focused on education,

health, and agriculture. If the West African region is to have a chance at peaceful development, Charles Taylor must be brought to justice by the Special Court in Sierra Leone, and programs like the Peace Corps must return.

With the Millennium Challenge Account, we're taking a new and innovative approach to development aid. Countries making strides to root-out corruption and institute sound, market-based policies will be treated as partners. Our experience with the African Growth and Opportunity Act has shown us that these standards are an effective approach to engaging with the nations of Africa. The MCA rightly sets standards, so that all benefit: countries that receive MCA funds benefit, but so too does the United States--by making what should be productive investments in the developing world, where our nation has an increasing number of key interests.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. This measure will make it easier for employers to offer health care to their employees. It is also going to help Americans save for their medical expenses, to gain greater access to quality health care. I particularly support the provision in this bill that would prevent a portion of the unused balances and flexible spending arrangements from being forfeited at the end of the year. Right now there is a use-it-or- lose-it provision that applies to workers. I have been working for several years to allow individuals to accumulate unused balances from their flexible spending arrangements to save for health care expenses. In this Congress I introduced H.R. 176 to allow individuals to accumulate $2,000 annually from these FSAs, as we call them.

Right now we have over 30 million workers in the United States that have these FSAs available to them. Employees and employers can set aside pretax

money which can be used to pay for out-of-pocket health care expenses and copayments and deductibles. Under the current system, unfortunately, employees forfeit money not used at the end of the year. Currently, this encourages wasteful health care spending because employees, knowing that they will forfeit unused account balances, engage in end-of-the-year spending sprees on services they may not need like extra eyeglasses, shades or unnecessary exams. So eliminating the use-it-or-lose-it provision solves this problem because then the employee will be able to roll over the balance from year to year. That is the attempt in this bill on that provision.

Preventing some forfeiture also increases the savings rate by increasing the disposable income of those employees in the program, and it also empowers them to make their own health care decisions. I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Orange High School for being this year's fundraiser for Leukemia and Lymphoma Society's ``Pennies Campaign.''

This year, the school's students and staff raised over $32,519 for leukemia research. It is the fifth year in a row Orange High School has come out on top in the nationwide collection, raising more than $150,000 since 1999. Celebrity recording artist Mandy Moore visited the school to reward them for raising the most money.

The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society is a voluntary health organization dedicated to funding blood cancer research, education, and services. The Society's mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, and other related diseases, and to improve the quality of life of patients and their families. Since its founding in 1949, the Society has provided more than $280 million for research specifically targeting blood-related cancers.

It is activities like this that strengthen our society and build character and citizenship. And it carries on this country's long line of volunteerism, which is built upon the principle of being a `Good Samaritan' and stopping along side the road to lend a helping hand. I am proud of you all. Keep up the good work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Farmers Insurance Group's 75th Anniversary and Diamond Jubilee, which it celebrated on March 28, 2003. This year commemorates the company's three-quarters of a century of serving tens-of-millions of policyholders and customers across the country. Founded in 1928 in Los Angeles by Thomas E. Leavey and John C. Tyler, true entrepreneurs and philanthropists, Farmers has grown into one of the largest and most successful insurance companies in America.

Nationally, Farmers Insurance employs nearly 20,000 individuals and has an insurance agent and district manager force of more than 15,000 strong. In California, Farmers is the largest state-based insurer and employs over 6,000 individuals and has in excess of 4,000 exclusive agents and district managers. These employees, agents and district managers are a valuable financial and insurance resource for their communities. They are also leaders in volunteer service. Over the years, Farmers Insurance Group's employees, agents and district managers have volunteered their time, personal finances and raised millions of dollars for local, state and national philanthropies and charities.

Today, Farmers Insurance remains committed to community service and providing excellence in financial advice and security. Throughout the last 75 years Farmers Insurance Group has emerged as the third largest property and casualty insurer in the country. It is my hope that the company will continue to make great strides forward and will remain a leader in the personal and commercial lines and life insurance industries.

As a Representative from California, where Farmers Insurance Group's home office is located, I am proud to congratulate all employees, agents and district managers on a successful 75 years of service to their communities.