Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, this Sunday marks the 10th anniversary of the September 11th attacks. I would like to take a moment to recognize Florida International University's series of events in remembrance of 9/11 and share my thoughts on the events that unraveled that fateful September morning.

It has been 10 years since the horror of 9/11, a day that will be forever ingrained in our memories. On that day, America came face to face with an evil the likes of which our shores had never before witnessed. This unconscionable terrorist attack--this barbaric and cowardly act of 19 men--declared war not only on America, but on freedom itself. Nearly 3,000 innocent victims--of all races, religions and ethnicities--lost their lives that morning. Millions more suffered in anguish as the news of the events quickly unfolded on our television sets and radios worldwide.

We were left asking the questions: Why and who? Why would anyone purposefully and mercilessly attack innocent civilians? Who could be so nefarious? In the succeeding years, we received the answers to our questions. We have identified our enemy and we have brought many of them to justice. Though our enemy has been weakened, we must remain steadfast in our resolve and vigilance to ensure that an attack like this will never again be brought upon our citizens. This is the debt we owe to those who perished on September 11th and to all of their loved ones.

For many of us, the memories of that day remain vivid--and wounds remain fresh--yet we gather here today to pay tribute not only to those innocent victims who lost their lives, but to those who gave their lives so that others may live. We gather here to remind the world of the courage and strength of our citizens. We gather here, united, to remind our enemies that our resolve will not waver; our spirit will never diminish. We gather today to honor the memories of every man and woman lost, and to give them our solemn promise that we will never forget; we will never rest until their lasting memorial is a world of peaceful coexistence.

Mr. Speaker, our nation's budget is out of control. Two years ago, our nation experienced our first trillion dollar Federal budget deficit. Last year, we experienced our second trillion dollar deficit.

This year, our annual deficit is projected to reach over $1.6 trillion--the largest in history. We are spending more than we can afford and in the process saddling future generations with a grim economic future. This is unacceptable.

It is also why my colleagues and I are here this evening. As women, we know the importance of creating and sticking to a budget.

The finances of many households are run by women.

We know that a family cannot wildly spend beyond its means. And yet this is what our government is doing on a daily basis.

Our government has acted recklessly with our financial security and prosperity. Just as our families and neighbors have had to tighten our belts during this recession, the Federal government must do the same.

Women have to juggle various household necessities while still remaining within their budget constraints. This is why Republican women support a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget to help reign in Federal spending.

It will help us start to get our fiscal house in order. A constitutional amendment will help ensure the future stability and solvency of our economy. Our grandchildren deserve nothing less.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Mrs. Carmen Cano, for her contribution to the South Florida community and on her 90th birthday.

Mrs. Cano, a native of Cuba, always had a passion for education and mentoring those whom she taught.

In 1952, she graduated with a Doctorate in Education from The University of Havana, and just a few years later became the principal of one of Cuba's most prominent schools, St. George's School.

Unfortunately, like so many, in 1960 she was forced to flee Castro's repressive regime in search of freedom and opportunity.

That opportunity was waiting for her here in South Florida.

After arriving in Miami, Mrs. Cano began to volunteer at Gesu School, where she helped to educate not only her students' hearts but also their minds.

Mrs. Cano's dedication to her students and professionalism led to her being offered a permanent position teaching 8th grade math.

In 1982, when the Gesu School closed its doors, Mrs. Cano's reputation throughout the South Florida community lead her to being offered a position at another of Miami's staple institutions, St. John the Apostle.

For 12 years she would continue to teach at St. John, where her great sense of humor, extraordinary teaching style, and her faith would earn the respect of her administrators, peers, and most importantly her students.

Mrs. Cano's friendly spirit and maternal nature gave her students, many of whom arrived in Miami alone, a sense of security and belonging.

I am honored to have Mrs. Cano as a constituent of the 18th District of Florida and thank her for all she has done for the South Florida community.

Happy Birthday, Carmen!

Mr. Speaker, today marks the anniversary of the attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Seventeen years ago, the Iranian regime, through the coordinated efforts of its embassy and extremist proxy Hezbollah, committed one of the deadliest attacks in Argentine history.

The events that transpired on July 18, 1994 served as a perilous forewarning of the emerging threat of radical Islamist militants in the Hemisphere and their state-sponsors.

The attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center of Buenos Aires took the lives of 85 men, women, and children, and left over 300 others wounded.

This precise location was targeted because it serves as the symbol of Jewish cultural life in a country that is home to the largest Jewish community in Latin America.

The attack is consistent with the Iranian regime's attitude toward the Jewish people in general, and toward the State of Israel in particular.

Only two years earlier, Islamic Jihad--a violent extremist organization with ties to Hezbollah--claimed responsibility for a similarly deadly attack on the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires.

Israeli officials determined that Iran, including high-ranking regime officials, had been informed about the plans for the embassy attack and had, in fact, given the authorization for its execution.

Tehran has made no effort to hide its anti-Semitic spew or its intent to destroy the State of Israel.

And in the years since, the Iranian regime has only deepened its network of proxy extremist groups and its unapologetic support of deadly activities worldwide.

This is evidenced, not just by its continued alliance with extremist entities which target civilians to advance their destructive agenda, but also by the fact that those directly responsible for the attack, as determined by the Government of Argentina, continue to serve as high ranking officials in the Iranian regime.

One such example is the current Iranian Defense Minister, Ahmed Vahidi.

Vahidi is facing an international arrest warrant issued by INTERPOL, but he remains a prominent figure in the regime.

In fact, at the invitation of Evo Morales, Vahidi travelled to Bolivia just last month to attend the opening of an ALBA military academy.

Encouraged by Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Iran has forged an unholy alliance with several countries in the region based on their shared rejection of freedom and democratic values.

Even in the wake of Iran's brutal crackdown on its citizens after the fraudulent so-called ``elections'' in 2009, the ties between the Iranian regime and the ALBA countries has only strengthened.

These alliances, and the resources and capacity they provide to Iran, are especially disturbing as the United States and other responsible nations are working to isolate the Iranian regime for its support of extremism and pursuit of nuclear weapons.

And so, as we remember the attack on the AMIA 17 years ago, we must do so within the broader, stark, and growing threat posed by the regime.

On that note, Mr. Speaker, I would draw attention to the strongly bipartisan Iran Threat Reduction Act, which I recently introduced together with Ranking Member Berman, and which has almost 200 cosponsors.

This legislation builds upon current law, closes loopholes, and provides for comprehensive action to address the totality of the threat posed by Tehran.

I look forward to its consideration by the whole House.

Mr. Speaker, I would also note that earlier this week, INTERPOL issued Red Notices for the arrest of four members of Hezbollah, which is sponsored by Iran, after they were indicted by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon for their roles in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri in 2005.

This should serve as a further reminder of the lengths to which Iran and its allies are ready, willing, and able to cause destruction and to wantonly violate international norms and obligations in multiple regions.

On July 18, 1994, the world was witness to an act of true evil perpetrated by the ruthless Iranian regime.

And as we mark the 17th anniversary of this attack and honor the victims and survivors of that day, we must recommit ourselves to holding the Iranian regime accountable for the AMIA attack and for the threat it poses to U.S., regional, and global security.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to mark the anniversary of the attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

On July 18, 1994, the Iranian regime, through the coordinated efforts of its embassy and extremist proxy Hezbollah, committed one of the deadliest attacks of anti-Semitism in the Western Hemisphere by killing 85 men, women and children and injuring over 300 innocent bystanders. Seventeen years later, Mr. Speaker, the regime has yet to answer for its role in the attack. Its statement this weekend was nothing more than a desperate PR attempt to manipulate the headlines in advance of today's sad anniversary.

And so as we mark the 17th anniversary of this horrible attack and honor the victims and the survivors of that day, we must recommit ourselves to holding the Iranian regime accountable for the AMIA attack and for the threat that it continues to pose to U.S. regional and global security.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mark the dark anniversary of July 20, 1974, when Turkish military troops illegally invaded the sovereign nation of Cyprus.

In the gray pre-dawn hours, heavily armed Turkish troops began the military operation named ``Operation Atilla'', implementing their strategy of ``clearing'' the territory in northern Cyprus, a community whose population was previously 80 percent Greek Cypriot.

As a result of these attacks, violent conflict erupted and over five thousand Greek Cypriots were estimated to have been killed; an additional sixteen hundred Greek Cypriots were reported missing; and over two hundred thousand Greek Cypriots were forcefully expelled from their homes.

Unfortunately, this tragedy which began that morning of July 20 continues today, as over 43,000 Turkish military troops occupy almost 40 percent of Cyprus' territory.

That amounts to one Turkish soldier for every two Turkish-Cypriots.

During the thirty-seven years the Turkish military has occupied northern Cyprus, illegal immigrants from Turkey flood into northern Cyprus, with some reports indicating at least 800 illegal migrants each year.

In total since 1974, this influx has resulted in more than 160,000 Turkish mainland illegal immigrants settling in the occupied territory, to the extent that these settlers now outnumber indigenous Turkish- Cypriots two to one.

Many claim that these immigrants are ``encouraged'' to settle in Cyprus by the Turkish government as part of a cynical strategy to alter the demographic statistics on the island and gain more property in any eventual settlement.

In addition, under the Turkish occupation, hundreds of religious and cultural sites have been desecrated.

Icons, manuscripts, frescoes and mosaics have been looted from Greek Orthodox, Catholic, Armenian Orthodox, Maronite and Jewish religious sites in northern Cyprus.

Over five hundred Orthodox churches or chapels have been demolished or vandalized.

Seventy-seven churches have even been converted into mosques, twenty- eight churches are being used by the Turkish military as hospitals or camps, and thirteen churches have been turned into barns.

For thirty seven years, the Cypriot people have endured conflict, division and foreign occupation.

It is long past time for their liberation.

The United Nations Security Council has passed seventy-five separate resolutions calling for Turkey to allow Greek Cypriots to return to their homes and to withdraw its troops from Cyprus.

In 1976, 1983 and again in 2009, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Turkey was illegally occupying Cyprus and must return all seized properties to their Greek Cypriot owners.

Yet, to date Turkey continues to ignore such condemnations of its actions.

Meanwhile, two generations of Cypriot youth have now grown up knowing no other reality than the division of their homeland, the segregation of their people, the militarization of part of their country by foreign troops, and the ever present threat of another outbreak of violence.

Many have, or are beginning to, abandon hope of a peaceful settlement.

Unfortunately, the limited progress achieved in the reunification talks since 2008 heightens this general sense of despair.

In fact, a few weeks ago U.N. Special Advisor for Cyprus Alexander Downer even stated, ``It could not go any slower without stopping altogether. The last three months have been the worst three months we've ever had since these negotiations began.''

This lack of constructive movement can be directly attributed to the behind-the-scenes interference from Ankara and the new hard-line representative from the Turkish community, Dr. Dervish Eroglu.

It is apparent that there are some both in Turkey and in the leadership of the Turkish-Cypriot community who believe that continued obstruction of the talks serves their best interests by garnering domestic political support.

I would argue that such a mercenary approach to these talks in fact prevents the Turkish-Cypriot people from attaining that which is in their long-term best interests.

Until there is the reunification of the country, the Turkish-Cypriot community cannot fully benefit from the economic and social benefits derived from Cyprus' membership in the European Union.

As a result, Turkish-Cypriots endure a far lower standard of living, reduced foreign direct investment, and other limitations on their overall development.

Therefore, I urge the representatives of the Turkish-Cypriot community to promote their own community's interests rather than their own by working for reunification of the island.

In that regard, I was encouraged by the recent pledge by both parties, President Dimitris Christofias and Dr. Dervish Eroglu, to commit once more to the talks with the aim of making substantial progress this year.

In order for these talks to succeed however, Turkey must grant the Turkish-Cypriot community full autonomy in the reunification negotiations and to publicly commit to abiding by any terms agreed upon in a Cypriot developed reunification agreement.

That includes the full, permanent withdrawal of its troops of occupation from Cyprus.

I will continue to do what I can in my role in Congress to support such reunification efforts, until that long-awaited day when the next generation of Cypriot youth realize the hopes of their predecessors for a sovereign Cyprus--independent, unified, and at peace.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of House Resolution 306.

I would like to thank my good friend from Illinois for the time. She has been a wonderful advocate on behalf of homeowners and renters of the United States, and especially in my area.

Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this bill to reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program as administered by FEMA through the year 2016.

Granted, the bill before us is not perfect, but homeowners and businesses in my congressional district--that stretches from Miami Beach all the way down to Key West--deserve to see stability brought to this vital program.

Since September of 2008, the NFIP has had 11 short-term extensions, and just last year alone the program was allowed to lapse three times. That is inexcusable. These lapses meant that FEMA was not able to write new policies, renew expiring policies, or increase coverage limits. And for a program that insures over 90 percent of all flood insurance policies nationwide--40 percent of those being in my home State of Florida--this is rightly inexcusable. Just as bad, for each of the 53 days that the NFIP was lapsed, over 1,400 homebuyers who wanted to purchase homes located in floodplains were unable to close on their home purchases.

It is necessary to demonstrate these irresponsible lapses will not occur again; and those of us in south Florida and the Miami Beach area to the Keys will stay prepared for any event that could occur during hurricane season, which is upon us again, and we need to know that the NFIP is there to help us recover. Let us not let another lapse happen right in the middle of hurricane season.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this much-needed, way overdue important reauthorization.

I thank the gentlewoman for the time, and let's pass this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

I thank the chairman.

My amendment is quite simple. It removes the 100 percent increase and possible flood insurance rate increases from the underlying bill. Currently, rate increases are capped at 10 percent a year; yet this bill would double that to 20 percent per year.

Homeowners in this down-turned economy can little afford to have this looming possibility. One in four Floridians is covered under the National Flood Insurance Program, and they collectively pay nearly $900 million in premiums per year. Since 1978, Florida policyholders have paid $14.1 billion in premiums and have received only $3.6 billion in payments. That is 3.9 times more in premiums than they received in claims.

Our residents, usually in high-risk flood areas, pay disproportionately more in premiums than they will likely ever see in payments on claims. Despite this fact, Floridians were near the cap of a 10 percent increase in the premium rates from the years 2009 and 2010, while the average national increase during the same time was 8 percent.

Despite these problems, the residents in my area say they need this program, but they need this cap where it is. People outside of at-risk areas file over 20 percent of NFIP claims and receive one-third of disaster assistance for flooding. Floridians, my constituents, know that the doubling of the amount that FEMA can charge for their flood insurance is aimed at them.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, which is one that will prevent unnecessary and unprecedented rate hikes for hardworking Americans on their flood insurance bills.

I yield the balance of my time to my good friend from Florida (Ms. Wilson).

(Ms. WILSON of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, this week a true Miami landmark celebrates its 40th anniversary.

Versailles restaurant has been a beloved institution in my South Florida community for decades.

Felipe Valls, Sr., opened Versailles in 1971.

From the very beginning, Versailles has been a family affair.

Early on, his son, Felipe Valls, Jr., bussed tables and worked with maintenance crews after school.

From these humble beginnings, Versailles has become a franchise with restaurants throughout Miami, Doral and even Pembroke Pines.

The secret to Versailles' success has been its family-oriented atmosphere and its simplicity.

Its menu of traditional Cuban cuisine has enriched the cultural palate of South Florida.

From ropa vieja to its house-made fried plantains and yes, even its famed ``cafecito,'' Versailles has become a culinary delight for its patrons.

Versailles allowed many Cuban-Americans to reconnect with their heritage.

For countless Cuban exiles, Versailles is much more than a restaurant.

It is a tangible piece of what they left behind when they fled Castro's gulag.

As a Cuban-American, I know the cultural and emotional link Versailles has with so many members of our community.

Versailles is a place where the Cuban community can come together and discuss topics as far ranging as politics, sports or the latest gossip or ``chisme.''

But Versailles has also become a destination for individuals from all backgrounds.

Its status as a cultural landmark has brought politicians, artists and celebrities of all stripes to its doors.

Today the Valls family is celebrating 40 years of Versailles.

Despite all their success, family is still the most important component in their lives.

It is also the reason why Versailles resonates with so many members of my community.

It reflects the love and devotion the Valls family has for one another and their community.

I congratulate Felipe Valls and the entire Valls family on this milestone.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 268) reaffirming the United States commitment to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, and for other purposes.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on House Resolution 268.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 268, sponsored by Majority Leader Cantor and Minority Whip Hoyer, and would like to thank them for their leadership in bringing this important resolution to the floor today.

We face a perilous juncture in the history of the Middle East. Our adversaries are far from dormant, and are focused on an international effort to isolate and demonize Israel. That is why it is all the more important for the United States to stand by our democratic ally at this critical time. So let's get the facts straight, Madam Speaker.

As even Secretary Clinton noted, this Israeli Government has made unprecedented concessions in pursuit of peace. Israel has always been willing and able to make the tough sacrifices. Israel has proven its commitment to peace. Unfortunately, Israel does not have a partner for peace and security as the Palestinian leadership continues to never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

Abu Mazen can utter all the right words to the Obama administration and the Europeans, who appear gullible enough to believe him; but the problem is, whenever the Palestinian leadership, past and present, has actually been asked to sign a peace agreement with Israel, it has always refused. Abu Mazen also continues to refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, yet demands that Israel recognize a Palestinian state; and the media he controls through the Palestinian Authority publishes a nonstop barrage of anti-Semitic propaganda.

The Palestinian Authority has rejected every offer of peace from Israel. The PA has refused to negotiate directly with Israel. The PA has refused to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. It has failed to crack down on violent extremism and anti-Israel incitement. Indeed, it has even tolerated and encouraged such behavior. It has also supported boycotts of Israeli goods, and the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister, whom some consider to be a moderate, even participated in a mass burning of such goods.

Instead of negotiating directly with Israel, the Palestinian Authority is pursuing unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state, from various foreign governments, with an eye to recognition of such a state by the U.N. this fall. Palestinian leaders also keep threatening violence to extract concessions.

Abu Mazen has not only failed to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, but recently signed a coalition agreement with Hamas, which is committed to Israel's destruction.

To demonstrate that they are true partners for peace, what Palestinian leaders must do is simple, Madam Speaker--the opposite of what they have been doing: sit down and negotiate directly with Israel, without preconditions; encourage Palestinians to accept Israel instead of tolerating and encouraging violent extremism and anti-Israel incitement; and recognize Israel's right to exist as a democratic Jewish state.

We must no longer demand that Israel take actions or make additional unilateral concessions that would compromise our democratic ally's safety and security.

Recent calls for Israel to return to the 1967 borders are unacceptable and dangerous. Continuing to provide assistance to the Palestinians--assistance amounting to $2.5 billion in the last 5 years alone--is certainly not the answer. Congress must not agree to the administration's 2012 budget request, which would provide yet another $400 million bailout to the West Bank and Gaza, including another $200 million directly to the PA.

There are also many other steps that Congress and the administration can and must take to support our ally Israel and to encourage the advancement of peace and security in the region:

The U.S. could show its support for the Jewish state's sovereignty and right to exist by moving our Embassy to Jerusalem, Israel's eternal and undivided capital. We should demand that the United Nations stop its relentless activities to demonize Israel and the Jewish people, and put our money where our mouth is.

The most recent example of this bias is a cartoon posted by Richard Falk, which was apparently taken down just minutes ago. The U.N. Human Rights Council has appointed Mr. Falk as an ``expert'' to investigate and condemn Israel. I'm sure that the viewers could see or they could pull it up on the Internet what this cartoon depicts. It depicts Americans and Jews as bloodthirsty dogs.

This is not the first time that Mr. Falk has spread such venom. He has compared Israel's treatment of the Palestinians to the Holocaust, and has questioned the veracity of the 9/11 attacks, but he continues to work for the U.N. Human Rights Council, with over 20 percent of his expenses and staff support paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

Has the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights ever condemned Falk and demanded that he resign his U.N. post? Never. To the contrary, her office has published an attack by Falk on his critics. I understand that he says now that his account was hacked into and that he has taken that drawing down, but I say enough is enough.

The administration should withdraw from the biased Human Rights Council, and Congress should withhold funding from the council and other U.N. bodies that do not advance our national security interests and condition U.S. contributions on real reforms. What a concept.

Finally, Madam Speaker, instead of dealing directly with the Muslim

Brotherhood, which seeks Israel's destruction and condemned the killing of bin Laden, the U.S. should deny all legitimacy to that group no matter what fake name or label it now uses as it tries to camouflage itself into a legitimate political party in Egypt.

I am glad that this body is doing the right thing today, Madam Speaker. We have much more to do to defend our national security interests and our indispensable ally, Israel.

I thank the gentleman from Virginia, our distinguished majority leader, for authoring this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am so pleased to yield 1 minute to our esteemed majority leader and coauthor of this resolution, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Madam Speaker, I am so honored to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), who is also the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), who is also the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, it is indeed an honor to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida, my colleague, Colonel West, an American hero.

I would like to yield 2 minutes to another Florida colleague (Mrs. Adams), a veteran of the U.S. Air Force.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).

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

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), who is also the chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe and Eurasia in our Committee on Foreign Affairs.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 515) to reauthorize the Belarus Democracy Act of 2004, as amended.

I ask that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 515.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would like to thank Chairman Smith and Chairman Bachus for their cooperation in allowing this bill to proceed so swiftly to the floor.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 515, the Belarus Democracy and Human Rights Act of 2011.

I would like to thank my distinguished colleague and friend, Mr. Smith, for introducing this timely and important measure.

Belarus has been correctly deemed the last dictatorship of Europe. Under the iron hand of Lukashenko, the Belarusian people have endured the systemic denial and violation of their basic freedoms and human rights.

The authorities in Belarus have severely restricted free speech and independent media. Prodemocracy political activists are subject to beatings and imprisonment. The regime's heavy-handed tactics were fully utilized in last December's fraudulent election for president.

According to our own Department of State's Human Rights Report: ``Authorities denied citizens the right to change their government, manipulating the December 19 presidential election to ensure that the president would not be seriously challenged.

``Security forces beat detainees and protesters, used excessive force to disperse peaceful demonstrators, and reportedly used torture during investigations.

``A crackdown on post-election demonstrations led to the arrest of over 700 activists, including criminal charges against five presidential candidates and numerous activists and journalists.''

Unfortunately, the regime, despite its repeated promises of reform, continues this campaign of repression against its own people.

In response to the rumors that peaceful protesters were planning to gather on Belarusian Independence Day, July 3, just recently, to show their opposition to the regime by clapping their hands, the dictator stated, ``Stomping, clapping, bellowing and roaring on squares and streets cannot solve problems. The state has the resources and power to pacify those who violate the law and the constitution.''

We have now seen Lukashenko did indeed use the state's power to pacify the demonstrators. How? He ordered the authorities to start by firing tear gas at the protesters, followed by the violent beating and imprisonment of those who dared to clap their hands. Over 300 activist were arrested and today 140 were convicted on such dubious charges as being hooligans or participating in unsanctioned demonstrations.

This unrelenting persecution of the Belarusian people by the regime is simply unacceptable. The U.S. and other responsible nations must support the prodemocracy forces in Belarus and hold the authoritarian regime in Minsk accountable for its growing abuses.

That's why I am pleased to support this important measure which, among other things, condemns the conduct of the recent presidential elections and the crackdown on opposition candidates and activists, expresses a sense of Congress that the President should continue to support radio, television and Internet broadcasting to the people of Belarus and expand on existing sanctions, including the denial of visas to any member of the Belarusian Government who participated in the crackdown on opposition leaders, journalists, and peaceful protesters that occurred in connection with the December elections.

House of Representatives,

Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC, May 5, 2011.

Hon. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,

Chairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Ros-Lehtinen: I am writing in response to

your letter concerning H.R. 515, the ``Belarus Democracy

Reauthorization Act of 2011,'' which the Committee on Foreign

Affairs reported favorably. As a result of your having

consulted with us on provisions in H.R. 515 that fall within

the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, we

are able to agree to discharging our Committee from further

consideration of this bill in order that it may proceed

expeditiously to the House floor for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee takes this action with our mutual

understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 515 at

this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject

matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our

Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the

bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may

address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our

Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an

appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate

conference involving this or similar legislation, and

requests your support for any such request.

I appreciate your including our exchange of letters on this

matter in your committee report, or in the Congressional

Record during floor consideration of H.R. 515.

Sincerely,

Lamar Smith,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 328, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 68) authorizing the limited use of the United States Armed Forces in support of the NATO mission in Libya, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 68.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not support a complete U.S. withdrawal from NATO's Operation Unified Protector. I believe that it is necessary for U.S. Armed Forces to remain engaged in a limited capacity. However, I cannot support an authorization which constitutes our current level of engagement for an entire year. This is what is proposed in H.J. Res. 69, offered by my friend from Florida (Mr. Hastings), and I therefore must rise in opposition to his resolution.

This resolution not only authorizes U.S. military engagement in Libya far beyond even the 90-day NATO extension, but it justifies U.S. military engagement in Libya as undertaken to enforce a United Nations Security Council resolution and at the request of the Transitional National Council, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the Arab League. So we must ask: Where is the United States Congress in this equation?

If an authorization resolution had been put forward in February, I might have been able to support it. I understand the mission. But in the intervening period, conditions have changed significantly on the ground in Libya, within NATO, with our NATO partners, and here in the U.S. Decisive action with congressional authorization at the outset might have solved this problem quickly, but now we have drifted into an apparently open-ended commitment with goals that remain only vaguely defined. And that is at the heart of the problem, Mr. Speaker.

The President asserted, ``These strikes will be limited in their nature, duration, and scope.'' Well, it is now day 97--97--of our involvement of U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities regarding Libya; yet Qadhafi still clings to power and the opposition appears to be no closer to a decisive victory. Command for the military operation has been transferred to NATO; yet the constrained role the President has said is being played by U.S. forces in Libya still includes nearly one- quarter of the total sorties flown in Libya; suppression of the enemy air defense through missile strikes; strikes by unmanned Predators on Qadhafi targets; nearly 70 percent of the mission's intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; and over 75 percent of all aerial refueling. Yet the President has yet to explain just what American interests are at stake and just what outcomes he is hoping to achieve.

The resolution offered by our Speaker, Speaker Boehner, and adopted by this Chamber on June 3 posed specific questions that required straight answers. Instead, we received a letter and accompanying documents from the Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs, which stated that U.S. actions in Libya were ``taken in response to direct appeals from the Libyan people and acting with a mandate from the United Nations.''

The administration proceeded to justify its current policy by asserting that U.S. military operations in Libya do not constitute hostilities. This argument is so incredulous that even the attorneys in the Office of the Legal Counsel do not agree. Therefore, I am not optimistic that the reporting provisions in the resolution we are considering today, which calls for ``a full and updated explanation of the President's legal and constitutional rationale for conducting military operations in Libya,'' will be fulfilled in a fulsome manner, respectful of congressional prerogatives.

Again, I must underscore that I do not support a complete withdrawal from our commitments concerning Libya. That would be dangerous. That would be ill-advised. A complete withdrawal of all U.S. military assets from the Libya operations would undermine our intelligence efforts and our foreign policy goals, and would all but assure a victory for Qadhafi. It can lead to greater instability, which could affect NATO operations in Iraq and Afghanistan at a critical stage of transition. There are also proliferation concerns at stake, particularly as an increasing number of weapons have moved into the region and reportedly fallen into the hands of extremist organizations, including al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. The Qadhafi regime is an unpredictable regime that has chemical weapons, including mustard and possibly sarin gas.

While a complete withdrawal is unacceptable, the resolution before us is also unacceptable. The resolution effectively ratifies all that the President has done, and it would grant him the blessings of Congress to continue on his present course. The resolution before us would enable mission creep, rather than setting clear parameters for U.S. engagement. I must therefore oppose this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Dr. Paul, a member of our Committee on Foreign Affairs.

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

I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe, vice chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger), a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and honored to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights.

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

I reserve the right to close, Mr. Speaker; so I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, to wrap up on our side, I am proud and pleased to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin), a member of both the Committees on Foreign Affairs and Armed Services.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentlelady from Washington for yielding me the time. I'm inspired to hear my wonderful colleagues, proud Republican women, proud to be Republican, as well as plugging our gender because we have a very positive story to tell our country.

And as my wonderful friend, the colleague from the State of Washington, pointed out, my name is Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; and I represent Florida's proud and beautiful 18th Congressional District that covers from Bal Harbor all the way down to sunny Key West, 265 miles of coastal beach area.

And I'm a daughter, I'm a mother, I'm a grandmother, I'm a wife of a Vietnam veteran, a former educator and a former small business owner. I fled Castro's communist Cuba with my parents when I was 8 years old. I'm proud to be a naturalized American, so Cuban by birth, American by choice. And I am also a Republican woman.

I entered public service after talking with my parents, with the parents of a school, a small private bilingual school that I operated along with my parents in Hialeah, a blue-collar working town of Miami- Dade County.

And after hearing from the parents of the school that I operated about their hopes and their dreams and the problems and the concerns that they had, I decided that the best way to help them was not just to help them individually, but rather to help them in a bigger way by being involved in the legislative process in order to change the policies that were causing them difficulties.

As we have said here tonight, Mr. Speaker, our Nation faces grave economic dissatisfaction and a sluggish economy and no job recovery. And Republican women understand and recognize the need for creative and bold solutions to get America moving in a positive direction once again so that small business owners, such as the Ileana Ros-Lehtinens in south Florida, who have a small school or who have a small business, are not hampered by burdensome regulations that inhibit their growth.

And we know how small business suffers due to this growing bureaucracy and this unnecessary regulatory wrangling that goes on and that has occurred in the last few years, and the previous speakers spoke on this issue of the regulation that has run amuck.

So Republican women also recognize this economic prosperity cannot be created by government because small and medium-sized businesses are the engines that fuel our economy. So together, Republican women don't want to--we're in unison to say that we do not want to leave this burden, this financial debt, this deficit to our children and grandchildren. We want to leave them with a more prosperous and secure Nation. And that's why I'm proud to be a Republican woman.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 294, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 292) declaring that the President shall not deploy, establish, or maintain the presence of units and members of the United States Armed Forces on the ground in Libya, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

I rise in strong support of House Resolution 292, sponsored by our distinguished Speaker. As the resolution states at the outset, the Armed Forces of the United States may only be used to defend and advance the national security interests of the United States, not to enforce, to quote the President, ``the writ of the international community,'' nor because of the United Nations, nor because of the Arab League. Yet these are what the President has repeatedly pointed to in justifying sending U.S. forces into action in Libya.

But what he has not done is explain to the American people and to Congress how the situation in Libya, if allowed to spiral out of control, poses a threat to U.S. national security interests.

It is an increasingly important region, Mr. Speaker, with implications stretching into other areas that are vital to our Nation. Little, if any, details have been provided in response to repeated questions regarding U.S. goals, the costs of the operation, the scope of the operation, and other issues of direct relevance to our national security. It is an open question as to whether the administration simply won't tell us or whether they just don't know the answers.

Members on both sides of the aisle are increasingly frustrated. I share that frustration. Many question the importance of Libya to U.S. interests, and especially the need for military engagement. Many more are outright angry about the disregard with which the President and his administration have treated Congress on the Libya military engagement.

But it is not surprising that there is a desire to simply say ``enough'' and to force the President to withdraw precipitously, regardless of the consequences. But I believe that we would only make a difficult situation worse by taking such drastic action. The negative impact would be widespread, Mr. Speaker. The news that the U.S. House of Representatives had mandated a withdrawal of U.S. forces would send a ray of sunshine into the hole in which Qadhafi is currently hiding. It would ensure his hold on power. It would be seen not only in Libya, but throughout the Middle East and North Africa as open season to threaten U.S. interests and destabilize our allies.

Pulling out of the NATO operation would also undermine our NATO partners, who, after years of prodding by us, have finally begun to take more responsibility for ensuring security and stability in the region. How could we then argue that they must maintain their commitment to our allied efforts in Afghanistan when we have just pulled the rug out from under them in Libya?

We must not let our frustration with the President's contempt for Congress cloud our judgment and result in our taking action that would harm our standing, our credibility, and our interests in the region. But clearly, we must speak out.

This resolution offered by Speaker Boehner would send an unambiguous warning to the President that he must either change course in his dealings with Congress and the American people or have the decisions regarding U.S. involvement in Libya taken out of his hands.

It states a fundamental truth that I assume that most in this Chamber agree with that U.S. forces must only be used to defend and advance the national security interests of the United States. It underscores that the President has not made a compelling case for U.S. military involvement based on U.S. interests, and it prohibits the employment of U.S. ground forces in Libya so that mission creep would not gradually lead us into an ever-expanding conflict.

It also requires the President to provide to Congress the information that we should have had at the outset, including, Mr. Speaker:

What are the political and military objectives of the United States and Libya?

How do we intend to achieve them? What specific commitment have we made to our NATO operations, and how might these impact our commitments in Afghanistan?

What is the anticipated scope, the duration, and the anticipated cost of continued U.S. military involvement in Libya?

What is the relationship between opposition forces that are grouped under the Interim Transitional National Council and the Muslim Brotherhood, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and other extremist groups?

How well armed are these and other extremist groups, and how extensive are their activities in Libya?

Who controls thousands of shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles and stocks of chemical weapons that Qadhafi has acquired?

Finally, Mr. Speaker, this resolution bluntly states that the President has neither sought nor received authorization by the Congress for the continued involvement of the United States Armed Forces in Libya. If this clear warning doesn't get the attention at

the White House, then more forceful action may be inevitable. The President can choose to act with the support of Congress and with the support of the American people, but he will not be allowed to proceed without it.

I urge my colleagues to vote for this strong and necessary resolution.

With that, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished Speaker of the House of Representatives, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on House Resolution 292 and H. Con. Res. 51.

With that, Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the chairman on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe and Eurasia.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), a valued member of our Foreign Affairs Committee.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to my friend and colleague from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers), a member of the Financial Services Committee and a lieutenant colonel in the United States Army, with a distinguished 26-year military career.

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

Madam Speaker, the resolution offered by the Speaker is the responsible approach. It expresses congressional intent. It affords one last opportunity to the President and his administration

to work with us in Congress to advance U.S. interests in the region. I hope that the President is listening and that this resolution will serve as a wake-up call leading to immediate consultation. And, frankly, we have not had that as we would like.

If, in 14 days, as it says in this resolution, the President has not complied with the requests included in the resolution, then this House will consider the next steps.

I therefore urge a ``yes'' vote on the Boehner resolution, a responsible approach to the President to work with us and a plea to give us the information that we requested.

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