Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, on May 21, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad convened a large gathering of international business leaders in Bethlehem to promote investment in the Palestinian economy. This three-day conference, organized by the Palestinian Authority, is an important milestone on the road to a lasting and secure peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

Earlier this week, Congressman Rahm Emmanuel, the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, and I participated with Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a Congressional leadership visit to Israel to mark the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the Jewish State. During our time there, we had the opportunity to meet with U.S. diplomatic officials, and my colleague spoke by phone with Palestinian Authority officials to assess the progress of efforts to bring peace to that region.

Following our discussions with Palestinian and American officials, we both express our strong support for the efforts of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad to chart a course of moderation and tolerance and develop an economy and society that provides hope and opportunity for the Palestinian people. The international community must support efforts, like this investment conference, which are designed to improve the lives of peoples in the region.

Madam Speaker, in this regard, we note our strong appreciation for the participation of business leaders from throughout the region, including Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, and the Arab Gulf states. We express our thanks to the Government of Israel for its efforts to make the conference a success, including by making the travel of so many participants possible. This conference is a demonstration of what is possible in this troubled region when people work together for a common good and reject the forces of extremism.

We express our thanks to major U.S. corporations that have joined the Palestinian Authority in this effort, including Cisco, Intel, Marriott and Coca-Cola. When they create jobs, spur investment, and strengthen communities, these corporations are truly furthering the cause of peace.

Madam Speaker, a recent World Bank report put unemployment in the West Bank and Gaza at more than 23 percent. This young and rapidly expanding labor force presents both an opportunity and a challenge for those of us who seek to promote the cause of peace. If these young people can find jobs, support a family and become part of the global economy, they will be a force for peace. The durability of the bonds between the Israeli and Palestinian business communities is testimony to the power and potential of these relationships.

If however, these young people are forced to rely on Government handouts and the charity of others, they are ripe for exploitation by those with extremist agendas.

Madam Speaker, the Palestinian Authority has begun making some of the difficult

choices necessary to create a prosperous future for its people. The contrast in the Middle East between those that seek a peaceful, negotiated solution to a conflict that has gone on far too long, and those that oppose this path, has never been clearer. We must use every tool at our disposal to support those who seek to build the institutions of free societies in the Middle East. The promotion of a strong, prosperous Palestinian economy is a critical component in this struggle, and we commend President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for their efforts and assure them of our continued support.

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

With this resolution, we affirm our support for the legitimate government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and condemn the actions of Hizballah that recently provoked the most severe sectarian conflict in Lebanon since the miserable 15-year civil war that ended in 1990.

As we meet this morning, the fate of Lebanon hangs in the balance. Will Lebanon belong to its secular, pro-Western majority--or will it fall to Iran and its proxies? Terrorist Hizballah, showing contempt for legitimate authority and employing violence against Lebanon's most progressive forces, has made a strong bid to prove that the answer to that question is that pro-Iranian forces will dominate Lebanon. That is why it is important for this body to go on record--forcefully--as backing the Prime Minister Fouad Siniora's democratically-elected government. We cannot win the battle for the Lebanese--they must do that themselves--but we can at least demonstrate our solidarity.

When the government sought to assert its sovereignty by taking on Hizballah's illegal, private intelligence network, Hizballah responded by taking over parts of Beirut by force, shutting the major roads to the airport and initiating sectarian violence throughout Lebanon.

Hizballah fighters also shut down Saad Hariri's pro-government television station and torched the building housing Hariri's newspaper. They besieged the homes of Hariri and Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, another pillar of the legitimate governing coalition under Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.

These actions were intended to deepen Hizballah's control of its state-within-a-state, to intimidate Lebanon's rulers and thereby increase Hizballah's influence throughout the nation, and, most worrisome, to push Lebanon deeper into an Iranian-Syrian sphere of influence.

Unfortunately, Hizballah's violence worked, and the government backed down rather than risk civil war. At least for now, the government has abandoned its plans to close Hizballah's private communications network and remove a pro-Hizballah general who presides over security at Beirut International Airport. Perhaps the government will re-coup some of its losses during negotiations with Hizballah now taking place in Qatar-- but it will not be easy.

Let me make two points. First, it is time to go beyond words. It is time for the United Nations Security Council to take specific actions in response to Syria's and Iran's flouting of Lebanese sovereignty in direct contravention of UN Security Council resolutions. Resolution 1701 forbids the transfer of arms into Lebanon without the consent of the Lebanese government. Resolution 1747, passed under Chapter VII, forbids Iran from transferring arms to any entity.

Iran provides training, equipment, and arms for Hizballah. Syria, at the least, facilitates the transfer of these arms. The resolution before us urges the Security Council to ban all air traffic between Iran and Lebanon and between Iran and Syria. It calls on all states on transit routes between Iran and Lebanon to implement strict controls. A total ban on commercial flights to and from Iran and Syria--such as that which brought Libya to its knees--also should not be ruled out.

Second, it is long past time for the European Union to designate Hizballah as a terrorist group and treat it accordingly. The European insistence that Hizballah should be seen as a legitimate political party is now transparently undermined by facts on ground, including the more than 80 Lebanese who have needlessly perished in the fighting of the past week.

Legitimate political parties do not have an independent military capability. They do not initiate wars with neighboring states. And they do not engage in international terrorism.

Last week The New York Times quoted Israeli journalist Ehud Yaari as labeling Iran's growing regional influence as ``a pax Iranica.'' Fortunately, there are brave men and women in Lebanon who want to resist this pax Iranica, and at their head, I believe, is Prime Minister Siniora and his government, even if their most recent effort to assert their sovereignty over the Hizballah terrorists has fallen short. Now is the time for us to affirm our support for him and his legitimate, democratically-elected government and to urge the international community to do likewise.

That is why I support this resolution, and ask my colleagues to support it as well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the nutrition title of the pending bill. It includes many urgently needed improvements to our food assistance programs for low-income people.

As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I am particularly pleased to see this title includes language to correct a couple of problems that have arisen relating to the enforceability of the Act and to ensure that no further problems exist.

The Food Stamp Act has long been recognized as fully enforceable on behalf of active and prospective participants. This history of enforceability is comparable to that of securities regulations, which the courts have long accepted. When, many years ago, a panel of the Fifth Circuit found no private right of action under the Food Stamp Act in a case brought by a pro se plaintiff, several other circuits, and ultimately the Fifth Circuit en banc, rejected that conclusion. Had they not done so, I have no doubt we would have intervened.

Recently, a couple of Federal courts cast doubt on this long-held principle, one by finding the Department's regulations on bilingual service unenforceable and another by forcing plaintiffs to meet the high standards for supervisory liability when suing a State to enforce the act and regulations against local agencies. I am pleased that this legislation overrules both of those decisions.

More broadly, the legislation recognizes that lawsuits by individual households or classes of household to enforce their rights under the act and regulations are an important part of the program. There now should be no doubt, if there ever was any, that all provisions of the act and regulations that help individuals get food assistance, or that protect them from burdens in their pursuit of food aid, are intended to create enforceable rights, with corrective injunctions or back benefits (the latter subject to the limitations in the act) as appropriate.

The act does not require States or the Department only to exercise reasonable efforts or to substantially comply with its requirements and those in the regulations: it gives each individual a right to be treated as the act and rules provide. The act and regulations have an unmistakable focus on the benefited class of participants and prospective participants, they are written in mandatory, not precatory terms, and they are concerned with the treatment of individuals as much as they are with aggregate or system-wide performance.

I cannot imagine how Congress could be any clearer in this regard. I anticipate that we will have no further confusion concerning the enforceability of the act and regulations.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I'm very proud to cosponsor this amendment with Mr. Skelton, the Chair of the committee, along with the Chair of the Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, Mrs. Lowey.

Among the many lessons learned from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is the stark fact that the State Department and Defense Department have failed to coordinate on critical policy issues in these two war zones. In fact, throughout the U.S. Government, there is a misalignment between resources and missions, expertise and funding.

The problems are most evident in the arena of stability and reconstruction operations, where the Defense Department has assumed the lion's share of responsibilities.

However, the Defense Department is now playing a greater role in a wide range of foreign assistance programs. By some estimates, more than 20 percent of foreign aid now flows through the Pentagon.

Some of this can be attributed to a lack of capacity at State and USAID, a problem we're trying to address through legislation authored by Mr. Farr, which the House passed and is now a part of this bill.

But to the extent these problems result from a lack of coordination, we need to take steps to help ensure that the day-to-day plumbing of our national security agencies is sufficiently welded so that personnel from different departments have incentive to work together, and that the objectives of these departments are properly calibrated with overall U.S. Government priorities.

This amendment constitutes a first step in that direction. It establishes an advisory panel, structured to ensure that the three key agencies charged with protecting U.S. national security and promoting American interests abroad, State, Defense and USAID, have equal presence. I hope that the panel will work closely with these agencies to produce a report that is

practical, well-informed and, most important, directly applicable to their day-to-day operations.

The one thing I know is that if this panel creates a dynamic where these agencies work as well together as I have found the ability to work with the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, we can make a lot of progress here. It's a real honor to have been engaged with Chairman Skelton, as well as Chairwoman Lowey on the appropriations side, in trying to come to grips with this problem.

I think this is a good first step, and I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.

Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of this en bloc amendment and want to make a few comments about Amendment #18, which was included in this amendment.

Title XVI of H.R. H658, the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, is the text of H.R. 1084, 110th Congress, as passed by the House on March 7, 2008, introduced by our colleagues Sam Farr and Jim Saxton. That text differed to some degree from the introduced text and is identical to what was reported out by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, as I explained at the time of House passage.

In discussions with the sponsors of this legislation in the other body, however, certain modifications to the text were deemed desirable, and this amendment, which has been agreed to by the Ranking Member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Gentlewoman from Florida, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, and by Mr. Farr, represents those changes.

I thank the Chairman and the ranking Member of the Committee on Armed Services for supporting this amendment, which will smooth the way towards the inclusion of title XVI in the final version of the bill.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this amendment by my colleague from the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Chairman, this is a simple amendment. It provides that any security commitment, arrangement, or assurance that obligates the United States to respond to internal or external threats against Iraq must be approved by an act of Congress or by a treaty that receives advice and consent.

Mr. Chairman, the United States has many friends around the world, including in the Middle East, with whom we have non-legally binding arrangement about security. However, legally binding security commitments to use the Armed Forces of the United States have only been entered into with the approval of Congress. U.S. security commitments to NATO and Japan, for example, have been made pursuant to a treaty subject to advice and consent with the Senate.

I believe that past precedent should be our guide as to how to deal with any legally binding obligation of the United States that would commit both the current President and all of his successors to defending Iraq. If the President believes this is wise for the country, he should not do it alone; it should only be taken with congressional approval.

Mr. Chairman, this is not an esoteric or hypothetical situation. This past weekend I was in Baghdad with Speaker Pelosi's delegation. It's quite clear from our discussions there that the government of Iraq at the highest level expects that any strategic framework or other

agreement between the United States and Iraq will include a legally binding security commitment that would require the United States to respond to threats against Iraq.

This amendment ensures congressional approval and, implicitly, congressional oversight of any proposed legally binding commitment to Iraq's security. I would hope that all my colleagues, irrespective of their political affiliation and their views about the conflict in Iraq, would agree that Congress should not be sidelined when it comes to what could be a millennial commitment to defend a country in the heart of one of the hottest regions on the planet.

I strongly support the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to my dear friends of more than 30 years, Hope and Harvey Schechter. They are being honored at the 7th Annual Hillel 818 Dinner Celebration for their generous support and outstanding contributions to Los Angeles Valley College and to our community.

I have had the pleasure of working with Hope and Harvey throughout the years on many important issues of concern to the San Fernando Valley, the State of California and our Nation. I value their counsel, respect their knowledge and appreciate the help they have given me in my career.

Harvey is a remarkable individual who has dedicated his life to protecting our civil rights and combating anti-Semitism and racial discrimination. From 1952, when he began his impressive career with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), until 1993 when he retired as Western States Regional Director of the ADL Foundation, he has been at the forefront on critical humanitarian issues of concern to the ADL, the Jewish community and the world at large. Harvey has been a mentor, confidant, friend, teacher and inspiration to others during his career. His speeches, writings, and incomparable wit have enriched all who have had the good fortune to know him.

Following Harvey's retirement from the ADL, he rediscovered the joy of learning at Los Angeles Valley College. He touched the lives of hundreds of students as he shared with them the knowledge he has gained in his 84 years.

Hope is an outstanding example of the American dream. Born in a small mining town in Arizona to Mexican-American parents who spoke no English, she overcame tremendous challenges to achieve great success. After dropping out of high school, she worked at menial jobs, including as an underpaid garment industry worker. Her personal experience with the injustices to unskilled workers led her to a career as a union organizer for the International Ladies Garment Workers Union. She helped improve the quality of life for hundreds of workers by her determination, positive attitude and resilience. Her career includes many significant contributions to our community, including Community Service Organizer, fighting for safe neighborhoods, establishing the first Head Start Operation in Los Angeles County, helping resolve racial issues as a member of the Board of Directors of the Council of Mexican American Affairs and many more. She became a Certified Court Reporter, established her own firm and was the first woman elected President of the General Court Reporters Association. During my brief period in law practice, Hope was my court reporter of choice.

Beyond her community contributions, Hope has been a valuable asset to the California Democratic Party, serving for many years on the California Democratic State Central Committee in a number of leadership positions and volunteering her time and efforts to numerous political campaigns. Hope's dedication and tireless efforts on behalf of our community are an inspiration to us all.

Hope and Harvey recently celebrated 53 years of a wonderful marriage. Although they have no children of their own, they have been ``adopted'' as parents by more than one hundred young people they have met on the campus and in the community.

I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in honoring two special people who's caring and contributions have benefited so many.

Madam Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to two dear friends, Rita and Jack Sinder, who are being honored by Valley Beth Shalom's 60th Birthday of the State of Israel Dinner Celebration. They are being recognized for their lifetime of commitment to Israel, the Jewish people, and Valley Beth Shalom, VBS.

In 1967, Rita and Jack made their first trip to Israel just prior to the Six-Day War. The outbreak of hostilities forced their early departure on the eve of the war. The impact of their experience motivated them to mobilize the American Jewish community on Israel's behalf.

Their dedication to Israel, however, began long before the State of Israel was created.

Born in Vienna, Rita was immersed in Judaism as a young child. During WWII, when Hitler invaded Austria, Rita's father was shipped to Poland. He fortunately escaped and her mother managed to get herself and her daughters out of Austria. Rita was sent to London on Kindertransport and was not reunited with her family until the war ended. The determination, positive attitude, tremendous resilience, and adaptability that helped her survive still guide her life today. Rita's family was miraculously reunited in America, settling in Los Angeles where Rita attended Belmont High School and graduated from USC with a degree in business administration.

Jack, raised in the Orthodox tradition by his father, a prominent Rabbi in Michigan, earned a degree in mechanical engineering from Michigan State. He worked for a machine tool company that supplied parts to the big three automakers. He was asked by an associate to help send machine tools to the Jewish fighters in Israel, and together with his friends, he shipped tools which ultimately helped in the creation of the Israeli aircraft industry and the Israeli Air Force.

Rita and Jack have been an integral force in the Jewish Community, living up to the motto, ``Give of yourself first and only then ask others to join you.'' They have generously contributed their time and resources to VBS, the Jewish Federation, Israel Bonds, AlPAC and many other worthy organizations. They endowed the Midrasha Program at the VBS, where Jack formerly was a member of the board of directors and currently serves on the board of trustees and the steering committee. Rita has chaired many special events at VBS. She is past president of the San Fernando Valley Women's Division of Israel Bonds and the Golda Meir Club, an active member of AlPAC, serving on its national executive board, and is past president and member of the executive board of the Women's Alliance of Israel. Rita and Jack are founding members of the American Jewish University's Wagner Program, university patrons and also patrons of the Wiesenthal Center.

Rita and Jack work together in their business, Jasin Co., he as a real estate developer and she as a real estate broker and property manager. They are the proud parents of Sherri and Alan and adore their three grandchildren. Rita and Jack's greatest joys are being with family and friends, boating and travel.

I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting Rita and Jack Sinder, who have devoted their lives to working for the survival of the Jewish people and the State of Israel.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the nutrition title of the pending conference report. It includes many urgently needed improvements to our food assistance programs for low-income people.

As a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, I am particularly pleased to see this title includes language to correct a couple of problems that have arisen relating to the enforceability of the act and to ensure that no further problems exist.

The Food Stamp Act has long been recognized as fully enforceable on behalf of active and prospective participants. This history of enforceability is comparable to that of securities regulations, which the courts have long accepted. When, many years ago, a panel of the Fifth Circuit found no private right of action under the Food Stamp Act in a case brought by a pro se plaintiff, several other circuits, and ultimately the Fifth Circuit en banc, rejected that conclusion. Had they not done so, I have no doubt we would have intervened.

Recently, a couple of Federal courts cast doubt on this long-held principle, one by finding the Department's regulations on bilingual service unenforceable and another by forcing plaintiffs to meet the high standards for supervisory liability when suing a State to enforce the act and regulations against local agencies. I am pleased that this legislation overrules both of those decisions.

More broadly, the legislation recognizes that lawsuits by individual households or classes of household to enforce their rights under the act and regulations are an important part of the program. There now should be no doubt, if there ever was any, that all provisions of the act and regulations that help individuals get food assistance, or that protect them from burdens in their pursuit of food aid, are intended to create enforceable rights, with corrective injunctions or back benefits, the latter subject to the limitations in the act, as appropriate.

The act does not require States or the Department only to exercise reasonable efforts or to substantially comply with its requirements and those in the regulations: it gives each individual a right to be treated as the act and rules provide. The act and regulations have an unmistakable focus on the benefited class of participants and prospective participants, they are written in mandatory, not precatory terms, and they are concerned with the treatment of individuals as much as they are with aggregate or system-wide performance.

I cannot imagine how Congress could be any clearer in this regard. I anticipate that we will have no further confusion concerning the enforceability of the act and regulations.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution.

One cannot help but be deeply saddened by the harrowing reports and images coming from Burma in the wake of Cyclone Nargis.

Television clips show bloated, dead bodies floating among scared and starving Burmese, desperate for assistance. Entire villages are destroyed, some with survivors in the single digits, others with no survivors at all. Because of the escalating cost of fuel, it is too expensive to burn the corpses of the dead.

As horrific as the current destruction is in Burma, there is the eerie fear that we are on the precipice of the situation becoming much worse. The threat from disease could raise the number of dead from the tens of thousands to over one million.

It seems unthinkable that in this modern age, 1 million people can be left to die as the result of a single natural disaster. Yet, that is what we face if we are not able to provide aid and assistance to the people of Burma.

And, if it is horrific to hear reports of the humanitarian crisis in Burma, it is nauseating to hear reports of the lack of humanity on the part of the Burmese regime.

The Burmese junta seems committed to preventing the full-scale relief operations necessary to respond to the current crisis. Instead of welcoming the outpouring of assistance from around the world, Burma's generals are letting aid groups and governments languish as they wait for visas.

The United States stands ready with so many other countries, international organizations and NGOs, to do what it can to prevent further loss of life and to help Burma begin to recover from this devastating storm. But the military leaders continue to rebuff our help and our pleading on behalf of the Burmese people.

Most governments would be strained by the demands of responding to such devastation,

and Burma lacks a fraction of the capacity necessary to deal with this crisis. To make matters worse, there are reports of corruption inside Burma eroding the efforts that are allowed to take place. We hear that supplies that were provided by donors are being confiscated by the government and resold back to aid groups. This is sinister profiteering at its most extreme.

That the junta went ahead with its scheduled constitutional referendum on Saturday in the unaffected areas is sickening and surreal.

The constitution under question is intended to legitimize the current ruling government. But despite its many, many crimes, this government has done few things that have so de-legitimized its claim to govern over the Burmese people.

It is time for the Burmese government to do what Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said it should do, and ``put its people's lives first.''

We hope and pray that, for the sake of the people of Burma, the junta does so as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5916) to reform the administration of the Arms Export Control Act, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the United States has a wide variety of foreign policy tools to promote the national security of the United States. While these tools are often referred to as ``soft power,'' they represent such diverse mechanisms as enhancing ties with friendly countries, ensuring that U.S. exports are regarded positively by prospective customers, ensuring that our policies reflect our values, and using U.S. assistance to stem the wave of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction that threaten our very homeland.

The bipartisan legislation before the House today, cosponsored by the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, represents a new and important initiative to accomplish all these missions.

Title I of H.R. 5916 reforms the Arms Export Control process, based on proposals made by Mr. Sherman and Mr. Manzullo as introduced in H.R. 4246, the Defense Trade Controls Performance Improvement Act of 2007 to create consistency in our export policy. It also provides for a strategic review of U.S. export control policies to help ensure they promote the protection of human rights.

It also amends the Arms Export Control Act to ensure that our close allies, South Korea and Israel, get the same expedited licensing review that our NATO allies, Australia, New Zealand and Japan currently enjoy. In this regard, the bill partially draws from H.R. 5443, the United States-Republic of Korea Cooperation Act of 2008, which was introduced by our colleagues, Mr. Royce and Mrs. Tauscher of California.

In addition, in order to address recent major sales of defense articles and services to countries in the Middle East, the bill insures that Israel will maintain its qualitative military edge against whatever security threats it may face, codifying this important principle into law for the first time. It also authorizes the security assistance to Israel, including implementing the recent U.S.-Israel Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Security Assistance.

It's only fitting that as Israel commemorates the 60th anniversary of its founding, the United States renews and strengthens its relationship with our most important friend in the region. Israel is a democratic island of stability in a sea of chaos, chaos which we continue to see just this week this neighboring Lebanon. It deserves all the support we can muster.

Finally, title III of this legislation provides for a limited waiver of current sanctions to support and accelerate U.S. efforts to eliminate North Korea's nuclear program. The waiver would apply to portions of what is commonly called the Glenn Amendment.

Glenn Amendment sanctions keep the Department of Energy from funding its own ongoing work on disabling and dismantling North Korea's nuclear program, including removing plutonium in the next phase of this process, as well as verifying that Pyongyang is living up to its commitments.

Until now, a flexible but limited fund at the Department of State has paid for this work. Continued exclusive use of this State Department mechanism will undermine the ability of the United States to urgently respond to unexpected opportunities to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons elsewhere in the world.

Title III of our bill allows for more rational funding and planning of these activities without giving the administration a blank check. It provides a narrow, carefully tailored authority. It also requires the administration to document for Congress each year the need for keeping this authority in place.

Title III also includes a provision authored by ranking member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen that reinforces U.S. policy regarding removing North Korea from the State Department's list of countries supporting terrorism.

The conditions laid out in that provision include certification that North Korea no longer is engaged in transferring to other countries any technology that enables the development or acquisition of nuclear weapons. The provision also underscores the importance of keeping the agreement laid out in the Six-Party talks, and it states that North Korea must agree to allow participation of the International Atomic Energy Agency in ensuring that the Yongbyon nuclear reactor is shut down and stays that way.

I pledge to this House that the Committee on Foreign Affairs will continue to keep a close eye on the implementation of the Six-Party Denuclearization Agreement. It is entirely possible that North Korea's own actions may sour the deal. However, in the interest of U.S. and global security, we need to forge ahead and accomplish what we can now.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. I urge all of my colleagues in joining me in supporting this important legislation.

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 12, 2008.

Hon. Howard L. Berman,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Rayburn House Office

Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I write to confirm our mutual

understanding regarding H.R. 5916, ``To reform the

administration of the Arms Export Control Act, and for other

purposes.'' This legislation contains subject matter within

the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Armed Services.

Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5916 and

the need for the legislation to move expeditiously.

Therefore, while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over

this legislation, the Committee on Armed Services will waive

further consideration of H.R. 5916. I do so with the

understanding that by waiving further consideration of the

bill, the Committee does not waive any future jurisdictional

claims over similar measures. In the event of a conference

with the Senate on this bill, the Committee on Armed Services

reserves the right to seek the appointment of conferees.

I would appreciate the inclusion of this letter and a copy

of the response in your Committee's report on H.R. 5916 and

in the Congressional Record during consideration of the

measure on the House floor.

Very truly yours,

Ike Skelton,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from California, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, Mr. Sherman of California.

Mr. Speaker, I extend an additional minute to the gentleman from California.

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

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5834) to amend the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004 to promote respect for the fundamental human rights of the people of North Korea, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

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

I want to first thank our colleague, Mr. Speaker, and our ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, for introducing this important legislation.

The human rights situation in North Korea remains one of the bleakest on the planet. As we speak, millions of North Koreans live in desperate conditions. Political, economic and religious freedoms are nonexistent. Many are starving and undernourished and live in fear of arbitrary arrests where they know they may be tortured or executed.

The North Korean government knows that access to information outside the country is a threat to the regime's control. So it maintains an absolute grip over all legal media, using it to manipulate the population into believing that life is no better anywhere else.

Those who manage to leave the country face further danger, denial of rights and threats to their lives. China stubbornly refuses to categorize North Koreans who flee horrific living conditions and persecution as refugees, instead labeling them economic migrants. This disingenuous, semantic trick relieves Beijing of its obligation to assist the North Koreans who escape into China in accordance with international conventions on refugees to which Beijing is a signatory.

North Koreans are routinely arrested and abused by the Chinese authorities and sent back to North Korea where they are considered traitors. Upon return, they are arrested, likely tortured, and sometimes killed.

Earlier this year, Pyongyang reminded the world how it treats those who desperately seek a better life by leaving North Korea when it executed 13 women and 2 men at the Chinese border. In response to the incident, a local North Korean official is reported to have said plainly, ``We shot them to send a warning to people.''

The suffering people of North Korea need assistance, and in 2004, Congress passed with overwhelming bipartisan support the North Korea Human Rights Act in an effort to focus U.S. attention on their plight. The Act provided new resources to assist North Korean refugees, support democracy and human rights programs, and improve access to information through radio broadcasts and other activities. It also required the President to appoint a special envoy on North Korean human rights.

H.R. 5834, which we're considering today, reauthorizes this vitally important legislation. The current bill extends the North Korean Human Rights Act through fiscal year 2012, doubles the original funding authorization for human rights and democracy programs, and enhances the role of the special envoy by making it an ambassadorial rank and requiring it be a full-time position.

I'm proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation, which I strongly support and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

The gentleman's ending quote was a very powerful one. And then there was a President here who said, that's why, with those kinds of regimes, you must verify.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today with great sadness to note the recent passing of Yossi Harel, the legendary Haganah commander responsible for shepherding thousands of Jewish refugees through British blockades and to safety in the nascent Jewish homeland.

Harel was perhaps best known for commanding the ship Exodus 1947, which was intercepted off the coast of Haifa by British warships in July 1947, carrying 4,553 Jewish refugees from Europe.

The unconscionable decision by the British authorities to send these Holocaust survivors aboard the Exodus back to Germany focused the world's attention on the plight of Jewish refugees and their desire to leave the fetid displaced persons camps in Europe for a new life in soon to be sovereign Israel.

Members of the United Nations Special Commission on Palestine saw first hand as these refugees, with their meager possessions, were unloaded from the ramshackle Exodus 1947 in the port of Haifa and prepared for their return to Europe--all just precious feet away from the land they had so desperately yearned to reach.

Incredibly these refugees--just two years removed from the horrors of the Holocaust--were held by the British in a former S.S. concentration camp after their return to Germany. This shocked the conscious of much of the world and further galvanized opinion against the British blockage and in favor of the establishment of a Jewish state in Mandate-era Palestine.

The story of those aboard the Exodus 1947 and their harrowing journey to Haifa was immortalized in Leon Uris's novel Exodus and subsequent film featuring the character Ari Ben-Canaan based on Harel himself and played by Paul Newman.

Though Harel is best known for commanding Exodus 1947, he also led three other ships to the shores of Israel, helping 24,000 refugees find safe harbor in the Promised Land--all by the time he was 28.

Today we mourn the loss of a great hero, who not only touched the lives of these 24,000 refugees and won the admiration of millions of people worldwide, but also came to symbolize the determination and pluck of the modern state of Israel.

Thank you, Chairman Conyers, for those kind words.

I rise today in support of H.R. 4279. American inventors, artists and businesses rely on intellectual property rights to protect the value of their creative works. These works, unfortunately, are being ripped off around the world. The rampant counterfeiting and piracy of U.S. products is having a devastating impact on our economy.

Counterfeit and pirated products may account for up to 8 percent of world trade, and a significant portion of this illicit trade are knock- offs of American products. Latest estimates indicate that U.S. businesses lose up to $250 billion a year due to intellectual property theft. This level of counterfeiting and piracy of U.S. intellectual property rights translates to job losses, lower tax receipts, and a greater trade deficit. It has also led to public health and safety threats ranging from exploding batteries to toxic pharmaceuticals to sawdust brake pads.

The economic threat and safety problems that counterfeit and pirated products pose for U.S. businesses and consumers must be dealt with. Given the difficult economic times we find ourselves in, it is that much more important that we address these problems quickly and effectively.

I am aware of the recent efforts the administration has taken to stem the tide of counterfeit and pirated products. The Department of Homeland Security has seized record numbers of counterfeit and pirated goods coming through the border. The Department of Justice is prosecuting and convicting more intellectual property thieves. The Patent and Trademark Office has stationed representatives in foreign countries to advocate for better enforcement. However, despite these efforts, intellectual property theft is on the rise. More must be done. H.R. 4279 is more.

The Act strengthens our civil and criminal laws in ways that attack the organizational structures intellectual property thieves are using and reduce the economic incentives that thieves have to engage in commercial scale counterfeiting and piracy. The Act devotes more resources to investigate and prosecute intellectual property crimes. The Act also provides more resources for the U.S. Government to work with other governments to improve intellectual property enforcement abroad.

And probably most importantly, H.R. 4279 provides a permanent and effective means of coordinating intellectual property enforcement activities. This includes the creation of an intellectual property enforcement representative in the Executive Office of the President and requiring that a national strategic plan to counter intellectual property theft be created, complete with clear goals and benchmarks that will facilitate accountability.

I'd like very much to thank Chairman Conyers, Ranking Member Smith, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Coble and all of their staffs, as well as mine, for the hard work they've put into crafting this bill. The hard work shows in both the scope of the reforms and in the strong support for the bill by U.S. businesses and labor groups, and Chairman Conyers outlined a number of those organizations and the broad sweep that they cover and their strong endorsement.

I'm also pleased to say that the amendments adopted in the bill before us go a long way in alleviating concerns raised over the operational independence of agencies like the USTR and the Department of Justice, without compromising the underlying reforms.

H.R. 4279 will bolster U.S. efforts to combat counterfeiting and piracy, and I urge support of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to be part of the debate on a bill being managed by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who perhaps is one of the first Members of Congress to speak out and lead the effort against the old apartheid regime, going way back into the late sixties and early 1970s, and who, along with Congressman Ron Dellums and many others, led the effort in 1986, I believe it was, to override the veto and provide the first really tough sanctions against investment that helped play a part in the ultimate downfall of that apartheid regime.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is a long overdue one, and it's the direct result of a stunning and, frankly, embarrassing story for the United States. The United States, throughout the 1970s and 1980s, had a much too cozy relationship with the apartheid Government of South Africa which had labeled the ANC as a terrorist organization. The apartheid government banned membership and political activity in the ANC and forced its leaders underground or into exile. A direct result of that ban was that under U.S. law individuals convicted of crimes, including the Nobel Laureate and former President of South Africa, Nelson Mandela, were deemed inadmissible for entry to the United States, along with individuals labeled as terrorists by the former South African government.

Much has changed for South Africa since those dark times. President de Klerk and Nelson Mandela negotiated an end to the conflict and an end to the apartheid system on behalf of the National Party and the African National Congress. In 1994, the country held its first democratic elections in which full enfranchisement was granted.

Today, the ANC serves as the majority party in a diverse ruling coalition. Yet, astonishingly, while South Africa completed its monumental political transition, the U.S. position regarding entry for ANC's leaders remained frozen in time. Leaders such as Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and Govan Mbeki, the father of President Thabo Mbeki, were continually barred from entry to the U.S. and had to apply for special waivers to gain entry.

Even more embarrassing than the original U.S. embrace of apartheid policies was the fact that few of those who opposed apartheid in the United States Government, including many of us in Congress, were even aware of the residual terrorist designations against ANC members.

Despite recognizing two decades ago that America's place was on the side of those oppressed by apartheid, Congress has never resolved the inconsistency in our immigration code that treats many of those who actively opposed apartheid in South Africa as terrorists and criminals, in part because the apartheid regime labeled them as such.

Increasingly, stringent security measures passed by Congress since 2001 have further ensnared ANC members. Because the ANC used armed force as part of its campaign against the repressive apartheid regime in South Africa, current law continues to regard the ANC as a terrorist organization and to deny entry to members based on their affiliation with the ANC.

The intent of H.R. 5690 is to purge the United States of any residual effect of its former policies with regard to the South African Government and to update U.S. law with regard to the ANC. The bill, as amended, specifically removes the ANC from treatment as a terrorist organization and grants the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security the discretionary authority to determine that certain criminal- and security-related grounds of inadmissibility do not apply to an alien with respect to activities undertaken in opposition to apartheid rule in South Africa.

I want to take a moment just to compliment again the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who has very strong and passionate views on the issues of immigration and, obviously, also, as we all do in this Chamber, on the issue of terrorist organizations and inadmissibility for those organizations. He has truly understood and internalized the historic transition here and the unfairness of the present situation.

And I do want to affirm one point that he raised. This bill does not have anyone close their eyes to acts committed by the ANC or by the apartheid government, and nothing here would preclude the Secretary, as she exercises her discretion, from considering whether or not civilians were targeted by an individual actor, civilians. We should, also, I think, take into account, as we decide what to do on this, the very powerful and legally binding truth and reconciliation process in South Africa which provided a restorative justice process that salved many of the wounds of the apartheid era.

Once enacted, the ANC will be removed from terrorist watch lists, and the ANC will receive treatment befitting its status as a leading party and a close ally of the United States. I encourage my colleagues to support the legislation.

Mr. Speaker, today, April 24th, marks the 93rd anniversary of the beginning of the Armenian genocide. I rise today to commemorate this terrible chapter in human history, and to help ensure that it will never be forgotten.

On April 24, 1915, the Turkish government began to arrest Armenian community and political leaders. Many were executed without ever being charged with crimes. Then the government deported most Armenians from Turkish Armenia, ordering that they resettle in Ottoman Syria. Many deportees never reached that destination.

From 1915 to 1918, more than a million Armenians died of starvation or disease on long marches, or were massacred outright by Turkish forces. From 1918 to 1923, Armenians continued to suffer at the hands of the Turkish military, which eventually removed all remaining Armenians from Turkey.

We mark this anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide because this tragedy for the Armenian people was a tragedy for all humanity. It is our duty to remember, to speak out and to teach future generations about the horrors of genocide and the oppression and terrible suffering endured by the Armenian people.

We hope the day will soon come when it is not just the survivors who honor the dead but also when those whose ancestors perpetrated the horrors acknowledge their terrible responsibility and commemorate as well the memory of genocide's victims.

Sadly, we cannot say humanity has progressed to the point where genocide has become unthinkable. We have only to recall the ``killing fields'' of Cambodia, mass killings in Rwanda, ``ethnic cleansing'' in Bosnia and Kosovo, and massacres and wholesale destruction of villages in Darfur to see that the threat of genocide persists. We must renew our commitment never to remain indifferent in the face of such assaults on innocent human beings.

We also remember this day because it is a time for us to celebrate the contribution of the Armenian community in America--including hundreds of thousands in California--to the richness of our character and culture. The strength they have displayed in overcoming tragedy to flourish in this country is an example for all of us. Their success is moving testimony to the truth that tyranny and evil cannot extinguish the vitality of the human spirit.

The United States has an ongoing opportunity to contribute to a true memorial to the past by strengthening Armenia's emerging democracy. We must do all we can through aid and trade to support Armenia's efforts to construct an open political and economic system.

With the arrogance of absolute impunity, Adolf Hitler famously urged his commanders to attack Poland with no fear of history's judgment because, as he put it, ``Who remembers the Armenians?'' The answer is, we do. And we will continue to remember the victims of the 1915-23 genocide because, in the words of the philosopher George Santayana, ``Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.''