Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, It is a great tragedy that the final version of the financial services bill which was approved by a House- Senate conference, contained little or no help for the hundreds of victims of Ponzi schemes, many of whom reside in my Congressional district.

This bill fell far short of doing everything or even anything, to assure the average American investor in the stock market that we want to protect their interests.

I proposed to the conferees certain amendments to the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA) in order to protect victims of Ponzi schemes. Unfortunately, these reforms which were designed after extensive discussions with many of the victims, were totally ignored.

My amendments included an ``anti-clawback'' provision, designed to end the terror of thousands of Ponzi victims, who face years of prolonged litigation against the government, unless these proposals are enacted.

Under no circumstances, except complicity with a crooked broker-- should these investors be subject to clawback litigation.

The opposition to this amendment has mainly come from the SEC/SIPC and Wall Street which seek to protect SIPC's right of subrogation, therefore taking money again from the victims and giving it back to SIPC. Not only is this disingenuous, but it shifts the burden of the financial loss to every taxpayer in America.

The importance of this amendment is that SIPA was intended to instill confidence in the capital markets and impose upon the SEC the responsibility to monitor and supervise those markets.

The idea that SIPC or the courts would hold innocent investors, who relied upon the SEC's endorsement of Madoff, to suffer judgments for amounts they took out of their accounts in good faith, is upsetting.

One proposal suggests that clawbacks be allowed against so-called ``negligent'' investors. How could they be negligent if the SEC and FINRA never spotted the fraud over a 20 year period? In fact, in 1992, the SEC endorsed Madoff as safe.

Shouldn't that affirmative statement be enough to shield investors from being accused of ``negligence?''

At a minimum, a defense against ``negligence'' requires innocent investors to spend vast amounts of money defending their conduct against a SIPC-funded trustee, who while making $1.4 million in fees per week, has

every incentive to prolong litigation against them.

As a practical matter, the court could say that every Madoff investor was negligent because they never uncovered the crime.

We should be protecting innocent victims of the SEC's negligence, not protecting Wall Street and its stepchild, SIPC.

Another amendment I proposed would have provided for immediate payment to all Ponzi scheme victims of up to $500,000 in SIPC insurance. That payment should be based upon the last statement the victims' received from their broker. This amendment also clarifies that any person who invested in an ERISA-approved retirement plan is a ``customer'' under SIPA.

Americans have a right to rely upon the statements they receive from SEC-regulated broker/dealers. This was the Congressional purpose of SIPA in 1970 and it remains so today.

Tens of thousands of Americans have lost their life savings because of the inaction of the SEC and its failure to close down the operations of Bernard Madoff, Allen Stanford, and others. Let's do the right thing for these people.

The President said he does not want BP to nickel and dime the oil spill victims, why is it OK to nickel and dime victims of the SEC? These people lost their life savings because of the greed of Wall Street and the inaction of the SEC.

We should have added these much needed amendments in order to ensure innocent investors that the American financial system is not rigged against them.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Djou), a member of the Armed Forces and Budget Committees and the first Member of Congress to be of half Thai descent.

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

I would like to start out by thanking the gentleman from Hawaii for those insightful words and for his personal commitment and family honor in making sure that we can have a peaceful resolution to this conflict.

And I also rise in support of this resolution which honors our Nation's long-standing alliance with the Government and the people of Thailand. It

also calls for a settlement of the political situation in that country through peaceful and democratic means.

The scenes on television screens around the world last month of Bangkok burning were unnerving to all who wish the Thai people well. A 2-month political crisis, which killed 88 people and injured more than 1,800, reduced landmarked buildings in the Thai capital to ashes. The fact that Thailand's King, the longest-serving monarch in the world, has been hospitalized for the past several months only added to the sense of urgency over the fragile political situation.

So this resolution provides an opportunity to extend best wishes for a speedy recovery to His Majesty who celebrated the 60th anniversary of his coronation this past May 5.

Thailand is the first Southeast Asian nation to have a formal diplomatic agreement with us in the United States. A treaty of amity and commerce was signed with the administration of President Andrew Jackson in 1833. The offer of a herd of domesticated elephants by the present Thai King's great grandfather, while politely declined by President Lincoln as unsuitable for the American climate, has long been cited as an example of the warm and enduring bonds between the American and Thai people.

When the congressional leaders gathered in Statuary Hall last week to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War, the flag of Thailand proudly flew with those of other allied nations behind the Speaker's podium. Thailand sent a regiment of 1,294 men to that conflict, of which 129, 10 percent, perished on the Korean peninsula. Further cooperation with the United States during the Vietnam and Iraq wars in east Timor and during a series of refugee crises in Southeast Asia has further cemented bilateral ties.

Cobra-Gold, the largest multi-national military exercise in the world, has brought the United States and the Royal Thai Armed Forces annually together for the past 29 years to enhance regional peace and stability. The growing trade between our two countries has made Thailand America's 25th largest goods trading partner according to the statistics provided by the U.S. Trade Representative.

So it is clearly in America's interest for the recent violence to come to an end so that this militarily dependable and economically vibrant ally can move forward toward national reconciliation. Hopefully, the proposed national reconciliation will lead to a permanent healing of Thai society so that the Thai people do not escape from the tiger into the crocodile, as the Thai saying goes, moving from one crisis to another.

This resolution, Mr. Speaker, calling for an end to violence through peaceful and democratic means and for a rededication to our vital alliance is something our Members should strongly support, as do I.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 1405, congratulating the people of 17 African nations on 50 years of independence and recognizing the importance of Africa to the United States.

Fifty years ago, 17 African nations threw off the yoke of colonialism and established themselves as independent nations. Unfortunately, the past half century has been anything but peaceful or joyful for all too many of these states.

Only two of the 17 nations we celebrate today--Mali and Benin--are considered to be free. One, Somalia, is virtually a collapsed state, and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a brutal civil war that continues in the east has claimed millions of lives and has spawned some of the worst human rights atrocities known to man. Yet there have been some successes, Mr. Speaker.

African economies are growing at rates reminiscent of the great Asian tigers. Citizens are becoming increasingly aware of their rights and are demanding a greater stake in their economic and political futures, demanding accountability and driving the ``Big Men of Africa'' from office. Still, in Africa, independence has proven to be a necessary but insufficient condition for freedom.

At a battlefield in Gettysburg, the great Abraham Lincoln honored the fallen by stating, ``We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that the government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.''

So, Mr. Speaker, on this 50th anniversary of independence for no less than 17 African nations, we stand in solidarity with the people who won their independence but who continue in their struggle for freedom.

I urge my colleagues to support this timely and important resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am so honored to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health and the author of this resolution.

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

I thank the gentleman from New Jersey, and we are blessed to have such a human rights activist on our committee and, indeed, in the entire House of Representatives. Thank you so much, Mr. Smith.

Mr. Speaker, the bill before us, House Resolution 1412, recognizes the efforts to date of the South African Government to fight human trafficking while urging sustained and expanded efforts for the future. According to the State Department's 2010 Trafficking in Persons Report: ``South Africa is a source, transit and destination country for men, women and children subjected to trafficking in persons, specifically forced labor and forced commercial sexual exploitation.'' Further, South Africa ``does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking; however, it is making significant efforts to do so.''

As the 2010 Trafficking Report recognizes and this resolution reaffirms, South Africa has, in fact, made notable progress in confronting human trafficking. The recent conviction by the Durban Municipal Court of two individuals on trafficking-related charges is particularly significant and merits recognition. Still, we have a long way to go, Mr. Speaker. Concerns over trafficking in South Africa have been heightened with the commencement of the FIFA 2010 World Cup games which are being held at newly erected stadiums throughout the country. The massive influx of workers to build these stadiums and other infrastructure, high rates of domestic unemployment, the arrival of millions of spectators and gaps in law enforcement capacity have provided an ideal operating environment for traffickers.

Criminal networks and street gangs are already known to operate child prostitution rings in the country's major cities where child sex tourism is on the rise. These same cities, including Durban, Cape Town and Johannesburg now boast major soccer stadiums capable of drawing between 40,000 to 95,000 spectators each. The confluence of criminality and opportunity created by the World Cup has presented major challenges for the South African Government. Unfortunately, these challenges will endure long after the cup has been awarded.

This resolution urges the South African Government to engage in an aggressive, sustained, and effective campaign to fight the scourge of trafficking. It urges the government to adopt the pending Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons bill and enforce relevant elements of the Sexual Offenses and Child Justice Acts. It urges the government to adopt additional measures to protect vulnerable children and other potential victims from sexual and labor exploitation. It urges the government to prioritize anti-trafficking law enforcement, particularly during the World Cup games. And, lastly, it encourages the government to prosecute tourists engaging in commercial sexual exploitation. I strongly urge our colleagues to support this timely and important resolution.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Royce and thank Mr. Smith, the author of this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade, and the author of the House companion to this bill.

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

I thank my good friend from California (Mr. Royce), the author of the House companion of this bill, for his leadership on this issue.

Today I rise in strong support of the Senate bill, S. 3104, a bipartisan bill that deserves our prompt approval. I want to thank the gentleman from California, who has been working on this issue for a number of years. And as we know, Mr. Speaker, an unfettered and independent press is so vital to the maintenance of liberty that its protection was enshrined in the First Amendment of our Constitution.

Tyranny cannot abide dissent. And the repressive regimes know that they cannot afford to allow the unregulated dissemination of information and ideas. People accustomed to thinking freely and speaking freely cannot be deterred from also living freely. These are the realities that drive our Nation's longstanding commitment to surrogate broadcasting, providing to oppressed societies the kind of news and information that local journalists would supply if they were allowed to operate freely.

We can all recall the important role that Radio Free Europe played in helping us to end the Cold War. For the past 14 years, its younger sibling, Radio Free Asia, has provided critical broadcasting in a neighborhood that contains some of the world's most antidemocratic regimes: North Korea, Burma, China, Vietnam, and Laos. It also broadcasts in important minority languages such as Uyghur, Cantonese, Wu, and dialects of Tibet.

Among all of the freedom broadcasting services of the United States, RFA, Radio Free Asia, is the only one whose authorizing legislation contained a sunset date, which Congress has repeatedly extended. It is high time to remove that sunset and make Radio Free Asia's authorization permanent.

Sadly, the need for Radio Free Asia is not going to end any time soon, Mr. Speaker. Making the authorization permanent, therefore, is an important signal of the United States' commitment, putting those regimes who try so extremely hard to block the Radio Free Asia broadcasts on notice that they cannot wait out our resolve to support freedom of the press in Asia.

In addition, permanent authority makes operational sense, as the recurring sunset has complicated Radio Free Asia's ability to hire long-term staff, to negotiate cost-effective leases and capital agreements. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, this measure before us deserves our unanimous support.

Let us stand today with the long-suffering people of China, of Tibet, of North Korea, of Burma, of Vietnam, of Cambodia, and Laos, and against regime-sponsored attempts to restrict the information they receive.

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

I rise today as a proud cosponsor of House Resolution 1462, which expresses the support of the United States to the people of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Agatha.

Having already declared a state of emergency following a volcano eruption just 50 miles from Guatemala City days earlier, Guatemala was hit by Tropical Storm Agatha on May 29, 2010. Floods and mudslides devastated parts of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador as a result of the storm. Hundreds of lives were lost, hundreds of thousands of survivors left in shelters.

Immediately following this disaster, as we always do, the United States, as a government and as a people, was standing by to lend a helping hand. The United States Southern Command, SOUTHCOM, located in my home district in Miami, Florida, deployed four helicopters from Soto Cano Air Base in Honduras to conduct aerial assessments and transport emergency relief supplies to areas impacted by the disaster.

The ability of SOUTHCOM to utilize resources from the Soto Cano Air Base demonstrates the important role that Honduras plays in enabling the United States to provide support for security and disaster purposes. SOUTHCOM also sent personnel from Miami to join a humanitarian assessment team on the ground in Guatemala. And I was proud to see Royal Caribbean Cruises, also of Miami, work with the Pan American Development Foundation to help transport food to the tens of thousands of survivors in the days following the storm.

The growing security challenges facing Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador as a result of narcotraffickers and vicious gangs have only been complicated by this recent natural disaster. It will be critical for the United States to work with responsible democratic nations in the region to ensure that this does not become a window of opportunity for criminals.

The success we have seen in Colombia and the ongoing efforts being taken in Mexico against the drug cartels have created an unfortunate sandwich effect in Central America. But only through a united hemispheric-wide approach that is based on a shared commitment to democracy, to security, to prosperity, will we achieve success against the narcotraffickers and organized crime.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of those who suffered as a result of Tropical Storm Agatha. As the brave people of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador continue to recover from this tragic disaster, please know that we have you in our hearts and in our prayers.

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

I would like to recognize an outstanding south Florida organization, New Journeys Transitional Home. This home is committed to decreasing the rate of homelessness among young women in south Florida. It provides an immediate, safe, affordable, and nurturing housing environment that promotes independence and self- sufficiency.

New Journeys Transitional Home serves those who have a desire to achieve educational and employment goals, as well as those with a motivation to progress through the program. This wonderful organization provides young women with workshops to help strengthen their educational and employment goals, their interviewing skills, and improve their self-esteem.

Due to its generosity and dedication, New Journeys Transitional Home has helped so many young women in my community in south Florida. I would like to commend all the individuals involved in the organization. Through their service and support, they help our community and they help so many young women in our Nation.

Thank you for your devotion; thank you for your commitment to improving the lives of south Floridians in need.

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

Throughout history, there have been many examples of states that were openly targeted by rising enemies but which failed to take effective action to prevent a potential threat from becoming a mortal one. This is at the crux of today's debate. The Congress will be sending to the President a long list of sanctions for him to implement. If all are implemented vigorously, this legislation could constitute decisive action to compel the Iranian regime to end its nuclear weapons pursuit, to end its chemical and biological weapons and missile programs, to end its state sponsorship of global jihadists; and in doing so, cease being a significant threat to our Nation, to our interests, and to our important critical allies, such as the democratic Jewish State of Israel.

If, as successive U.S. administrations have done, the sanctions are ignored, then we will have failed the American people. The Iranian regime has been constructing the means to make nuclear weapons, along with the missiles with which to strike other countries, for decades. Fifteen years ago, the U.S. took the lead to stop Iran. The U.S. demonstrated its commitment by withdrawing from commercial activities involving this rogue state. Congress then enacted the Iran Sanctions Act, hoping to use it as leverage for cooperation from our allies in preventing the Iranian threat from escalating.

The 1996 law sought consultations first, but called for the imposition of sanctions unless allied governments had ``taken specific and effective actions, including, as appropriate, the imposition of penalties to terminate the involvement'' of their nationals in the sanctionable activity.

But as the Iranian threat has grown, our allies have taken very limited steps regarding Iran. The international community has merely supported tepid U.N. Security Council resolutions that impose modest sanctions on the regime while restating the willingness to engage in negotiations and offer concessions to Tehran. Some countries have actively opposed placing any punitive measures on the Iranian regime despite the fact that its violations of its international obligations have been repeatedly demonstrated by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Russia and China, in particular, have acted as surrogates for Iran and have watered down every proposed Security Council resolution. The regime in Tehran has reason to be grateful for their efforts and their tireless work on their behalf. How sad.

Now the U.S. has chosen to reward the likes of Russia by removing sanctions on entities assisting the Iranian nuclear and missile programs and offering the Russian Federation a nuclear cooperation agreement on the same day that the Russian president offered the same nuclear deal to the Syrian regime.

We are at a defining moment, Mr. Speaker. The opportunity we have before us in the form of this conference report may well prove to be one of our last best hopes to force Iran to end its nuclear weapons program and its policies that threaten our security.

When appointed as a conferee for this bill, my goal was for the final product to have a comprehensive crippling sanction policy targeting the Iranian regime. In principle, this conference report is a step forward. It expands the types of sanctions and the range of actors and activities to be sanctioned in an effort to strike at the Iranian regime's key vulnerabilities, especially its dependence on refined petroleum. The most important are a set of financial measures that, if implemented, would force foreign financial institutions to choose between doing business with Iran or with us in the United

States. It also increases penalties on violators.

Unfortunately, this act also contains a key element that could significantly undercut its effectiveness, multiple exceptions and waivers for the President and executive branch officials.

That means by a stroke of a pen, substantive provisions can be transformed into mere recommendations or options. We must not allow this to happen.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

Mr. Speaker, I proudly yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor), the esteemed minority whip.

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), the chairman of the House Republican Conference, a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and a House conferee on this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, as well as a House conferee on this important measure.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California, Mr. Ed Royce, the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade, and a House conferee on this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett), the ranking member on the Financial Services Subcommittee on

Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises, as well as a House conferee on this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry), a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), an esteemed member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks), the chairman of the National Security Working Group of the Republican Study Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), a member of the Agriculture, Veterans' Affairs, and Transportation Committees.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe, a member of our Committee on Foreign Affairs.

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

Mr. Speaker, it may surprise some to learn that the penalties in the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 have never been imposed on a single individual or a company. Only once has a company even been found to be in violation of its provisions, but sanctions were immediately waived by the Clinton administration due to the protests by the Russian, French, and Malaysian Governments, which did not want their companies penalized for doing business with Iran. It should be noted that the same companies--Russia's Gazprom, France's Total, and Malaysia's Petronas--are still providing the Iranian regime a vital economic lifeline through energy-related investments.

I and other members of the conference committee had hoped that this bill before us would avoid repeating past mistakes--that is, avoid undermining its effectiveness by giving the President an option of doing nothing. This was not to be.

The result is that the President is authorized to waive not only the imposition of sanctions for refined petroleum transactions, investments in Iran's energy sector, and aid to Iran's programs on weapons of mass destruction, missile, and advanced conventional weapons, but even on basic investigations and determinations of some sanctionable activities.

With respect to the inclusion of financial sanctions and a visa ban against those committing serious human rights abuses against the Iranian people, not only can the President waive the sanctions, but he can waive the requirement to name and shame these human rights abusers by listing them publicly.

Some will argue that this bill goes further than any before in forcing the President to act. However, it is disingenuous to make such a claim given that the President could have issued an

Executive order to implement a wide array of additional Iran sanctions, but he didn't.

The version passed by the House prohibited the entry into force of a nuclear cooperation agreement with any country assisting Iranian proliferation. Its purpose was to prevent a country that is undermining U.S. efforts to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program from being rewarded with a lucrative nuclear cooperation agreement.

That prohibition is not included in the conference report. The text before us does include the prohibition in the House-passed bill on transfers of U.S. nuclear technology to a country that has jurisdiction over entities that have assisted Iran's proliferation programs. However, it provides the President with what amounts to a waiver to approve such transfers on a case-by-case basis, and if the President deems it to be in vital national security interest. It also wipes the slate clean regarding any proliferation violations that took place before the date that this bill is enacted. Some of us view this to be a carve-out for Russia.

Mr. Speaker, at long last, the time has come for us to act. The time is now. We should support the conference report and ensure that the sanctions are vigorously enforced.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank my good friend for the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill to extend the National Flood Insurance Program, as administered by FEMA, until September 30, 2010. About 90 percent of all flood insurance policies nationwide are provided through the National Flood Insurance Program, and nearly half of those policies are held in my home State of Florida.

Flood insurance in a hurricane-prone State is not merely a necessity; it is a requirement for those homeowners with mortgages. For nearly 1 month, prospective homeowners in my congressional district of south Florida have been in limbo. Unable to secure the required flood insurance, these individuals and families have been unable to close on their homes. Their frustration is palpable. New buyers in the housing market are needed to help my congressional district recover from this economic downturn.

At a time when the Federal Government is increasing incentives for homeownership, it is utterly bizarre that Congress would fail to extend a program that is required for many mortgages to be finalized. The National Flood Insurance Program is a necessity, and its extension should not be subject to partisan politics.

This bill extends the program until the end of September, but it must be extended for several years so that homeowners can buy and sell their properties without worries. This uncertainty produced by Band-Aid extensions of the flood insurance program is hurting an already ailing housing market.

I am a cosponsor of Congressman Cao's bill, which extends the program for 3 years; and I encourage my colleagues to cosponsor the bill of the gentleman from Louisiana, H.R. 5553, and I will also be introducing a bill to further extend this popular flood insurance program.

Mr. Speaker, we have extended this program three times since it has expired. Let's get this right. Flood insurance is critically important for homeowners. Also, let's reform it so it does not face continual financial shortfalls.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' for this much- needed, way overdue, important extension.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of House Resolution 1350. And I want to thank my good friend and colleague from California, Ambassador Watson, for introducing this worthy measure.

This issue is important to me not just as the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee or as a Member who represents one of the top 20 refugee resettlement areas in the United States, but also as a former refugee. Refugees have been a core component of our wonderful Nation since its creation. Whether they were early colonists fleeing religious persecution in Europe or families of the 20th century fleeing Communist tyranny, as mine fled the Castro regime, refugees have found in this great Nation safety, freedom, and opportunity.

From the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 to the Refugees Act of 1980 until today, I am proud of the work that Congress has done over the years to keep refugee protection a priority of our government. Traditionally, the United States has resettled more refugees on an annual basis than the rest of the world combined. But our country also lives up to its own highest ideals when we reach out overseas to help and protect those most vulnerable of the vulnerables, those forced from their home by persecution. Whether due to the ethnic, sectarian, or political conflict in Africa or the Middle East, or repression by regimes like those in Burma, North Korea, or Sudan, tens of millions of children, women, and men around the world stand in need of food, shelter, and protection.

Because of this vulnerability, they are also prime targets for dehumanizing forms of exploitation and human trafficking. By supporting the work of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and the many dedicated nongovernmental organizations, the people of the United States continue to show our generosity toward the displaced and the vulnerable.

World Refugee Day, observed for the 10th time this past weekend, is a fitting time for us to reflect on these dire human needs, to commend the bravery and service of those who assist refugees in insecure circumstances around the world, and to recommit ourselves to the protection of displaced populations as a humanitarian and human rights priority. For these reasons, Madam Speaker, I support Ambassador Watson's measure, and I urge its prompt adoption.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), who is the ranking member on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia.

I thank my good friend from Indiana. I wholeheartedly agree with his remarks.

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

I rise in strong support of this important resolution which honors, as the inscription at the Korean War Memorial reads, our ``sons and daughters who answered the call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met.''

On a predawn Sunday morning in June 1950, while the world slept and the church bells of Seoul had yet to ring, North Korea launched a sudden, unprovoked military strike on the Republic of Korea. President Harry Truman, when he received the news, immediately returned to Washington and summoned his Cabinet. Within 48 hours, the President had directed General Douglas MacArthur to undertake a vigorous defense of South Korea and her people. The rest is history, history of what has come to be known as The Forgotten War.

The conflict in Korea became the first test of the mettle of the West in confronting Communist aggression in the Cold War. Over 50,000 of the boys and young men and women of the summer of 1950 who left for Korea did not return, including over 33,000 who fell in combat. In the sweltering heat of that summer, in the monsoon rains, on the windswept expanse of the Yalu River, and in the bloody withdrawal from the icy Chosin Reservoir the following winter, they gave, in some cases, their last full measure of devotion.

Names like Heartbreak Ridge, Pork Chop Hill, Gloucester Valley, where British, Belgian, and Philippine troops joined with their American comrades in arms, echo down to us in the slowly fading memories of aging warriors.

Were their great sacrifices worth the cost, worth the blood, sweat, and tears of the boys of summer of 1950? One only has to look at the faces of those living in freedom in South Korea. One only has to look at the gleaming towers of the bright skyline of Seoul in contrast to the darkness, the impoverishment, and the fear that lies north of the 38th parallel to say thank God for those brave men and women who risked all to save so many from Communist oppression.

However, we were unable to help save them all. One need only reflect on the huddled refugees, crossing the vastness of China on the underground ``Seoul train.''

One need only think of the young North Korean women, escaping the hopelessness of sexual bondage in China for freedom in South Korea, to know that those who answered Harry Truman's call truly made a difference.

I was a proud sponsor of the reauthorization of the North Korean Human Rights Act during the last Congress to help address some of those issues.

Today, dark clouds hang once again over the Korean peninsula. The vibrant economy and flourishing democracy of a South Korea which had risen from the ashes of war is again under the threat of the tyrannical and belligerent north.

In March, in a clear violation of the armistice agreement, North Korea launched another sudden, unprovoked attack, torpedoing a South Korean naval vessel and murdering 46 young South Korean sailors. And Pyongyang's provocation is not limited to military strikes. In actions which are clearly those of a state sponsor of terrorism, North Korea sent a hit squad of agents to Seoul to assassinate a leading dissident and attempted to ship weapons via Bangkok to designated terrorist organizations Hamas and Hezbollah.

Madam Speaker, now is the time for our President to show some of the mettle that defined our Nation 60 years ago and stand up to the North Koreans by redesignating their country as a state sponsor of terrorism. Our South Korean, Japanese, and Israeli allies are depending on us to help shield them from North Korean provocations and weapons of mass destruction.

In the crisis on the Korean peninsula, Beijing has played a cynical game, calling for denuclearization of the Korean peninsula on one hand, and shielding its North Korean cronies on the other hand. Beijing even had the audacity to publicly warn South Korea not to let the aircraft carrier USS George Washington enter waters lying between the Korean peninsula and China for a proposed joint U.S.-South Korean naval exercise.

Well, we have news for Beijing: If you don't want the USS George Washington in your backyard, then you had better rein in the bullies in Pyongyang.

Another sterling legacy of the Forgotten War is the vibrant Korean American community. Immigrants from Korea over the past six decades have contributed immeasurably to the American mosaic, impacting positively this Nation's economic, educational, scientific, and cultural life. Economic and trade ties have also boomed between our two countries in the decades since the war, ties which could be greatly invigorated by prompt congressional action on the proposed free trade agreement with South Korea.

Thus, it is perfectly clear that the world is a better place because of the heroism in Korea of the Boys of Summer 60 years ago this month. The 60th anniversary of the outbreak of war in Korea is an appropriate time to demonstrate that we continue to stand with our South Korean allies. The people of South Korea should be assured that we stood with you in the summer of 1950; we stood with you during the recent Cheonan crisis; and we shall stand with you until the day of peaceful reunification with your abused and besieged brethren in the north.

Madam Speaker, I strongly and enthusiastically urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I rise in support of this resolution recognizing the mutual benefits for the United States and Japan of a treaty which went into effect exactly 50 years ago today. The Asia Pacific region was a dangerous neighborhood a half a century ago. The United States and our allies had just fought the first hot battles of the Cold War on the Korean peninsula. Tensions were high in the Taiwan Strait, and the war in Vietnam was just then emerging on the horizon.

A half century later, Asia, while now the prosperous trading hub of the world, is still dangerous. One need only look to the recent torpedoing of a South Korean naval vessel by a reckless North Korea to recognize that the Asia Pacific region is not yet truly pacific.

Through all the perils in the Pacific, the United States-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security has stood as a cornerstone of a continued regional peace and prosperity. None of this would be possible without the contribution of the people of Japan, and especially those on Okinawa, through their continued hosting of our proud U.S. Armed Forces.

The smooth transition from bitter adversaries to full partners is a tribute to the resiliency and the farsightedness of two peoples on opposite sides of the Pacific: the people of the United States and the people of Japan. The recent reaffirmation of the commitment to full implementation of the 2006 Roadmap and the Guam International Agreement for realignment of U.S. Armed Forces in Japan is a concrete step forward in cementing this crucial alliance.

The mutual cooperation promised in the treaty 50 years ago, however, extends far beyond the Japanese islands. When the U.S. looked for partners in dealing with the aftermath of the devastating earthquake in Haiti earlier this year, Japan's Self-Defense Forces were there working with their American counterparts.

On the critical issue of the stabilization of the volatile situation in South Asia, Japan has been a generous contributor in economic assistance to both Afghanistan and Pakistan. And Japan has been a stalwart ally in our U.S. efforts to end the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile technology by the reckless regime in Pyongyang.

Both within the United Nations and during the Six-Party process in Beijing, Japan has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with its American ally in opposing continued North Korean nuclear brinksmanship. North Korean threats and aggression continue. We should immediately re-list North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. This is both because of Pyongyang's past abductions of Japanese citizens and because of North Korea's continued links to terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. There is no greater signal that this administration can send to the Japanese people in this treaty anniversary year than acting expeditiously to hold North Korea fully accountable for such terrorist activities.

I join in the anticipation expressed in this resolution of another 50 years of unshakable friendship and deepening cooperation with the people of Japan.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart), a member of the Budget, Science and Technology, and Transportation Committees.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the ranking member on the Agriculture Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management.

Madam Speaker, I am so honored to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the ranking member on the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade who has been a proud proponent of passing the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today as the proud author of the resolution before us, House Resolution 1465, which reaffirms the longstanding friendship and the deep alliance between the United States and Colombia.

Furthermore, it recognizes our shared commitment to democracy, and it congratulates Juan Manuel Santos as President-elect of Colombia.

In Colombia, we have seen the impossible become possible. Once under siege by extremist groups and drug cartels, the people of Colombia and its government have transformed a dark past into a promising bright future. The recent Presidential elections in Colombia are a testament to this progress and demonstrate the confidence that the people of Colombia have in President-elect Santos. Receiving 69 percent of the vote, President-elect Santos has a clear mandate to continue much of the progress seen under President Uribe.

Following his victory on Sunday, President-elect Santos said, ``Colombia is leaving its nightmare. The FARC's time has run out. No more useless confrontations, no more divisions. The time has arrived for union. The time has arrived for work, employment and entrepreneurialism.''

Juan Manuel Santos' professed commitment to the values of freedom and demonstrated ability to stand up to extremists stands in stark contrast to the tyrannical and destabilizing agendas of dictators in the region. Further, the free and fair nature of the multiparty, internationally recognized Presidential election in Colombia serves as an important reminder to some in the region of what a real and genuine democratic electoral process really looks like.

With elections scheduled soon in Venezuela and Nicaragua, we have already seen both Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega pulling out all the stops to question their opposition. From the media to the courts, Chavez and Ortega have no shame in their abject dismissal of the democratic processes in their countries. However, as critical as it is to call out those who affront the principles of a democratic society, it is equally important to recognize those who embrace them, which is why we are here today, Madam Speaker, standing in support of House Resolution 1465.

Colombia represents to many the light at the end of the tunnel. Colombia shows that, with hard work, determination and a commitment to fundamental freedoms, a democracy can flourish no matter what the odds. Instead of falling into a deep division, Colombia is ascending the peak of freedom and democracy. I have no doubt that the vital alliance between our country and Colombia is poised to become ever closer and more successful than ever under the leadership of President-elect Santos, and I remain ever hopeful that this alliance will soon include the passage of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

Colombia has enormous potential for U.S. businesses, especially in my home State of Florida. Miami had nearly $6 billion in total trade with Colombia last year alone. Signed nearly 4 years ago, the FTA is one of the easiest, most obvious steps that Congress can take to expand these important economic ties.

We can ask for no better partner or trusted ally than the people of Colombia. Its commitment to the democratic process, as demonstrated by this weekend's free, fair, and transparent election, shows what can be accomplished when the basic tenets of liberty are afforded to the people of a nation.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate President- elect Santos on this momentous occasion, and once again, I would like to recognize the unbreakable ties between the people of the United States and Colombia.

I am so pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas--they only come that way in Texas--Judge Poe, an esteemed member of our Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend from Texas.

I have no further requests for time, Madam Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Since its creation over 6 decades ago, our ally Israel has been under siege from those who seek its destruction. Israel's enemies, refusing to accept the existence of the Jewish State, have invaded Israel's borders and sought to wipe it off the map. They have launched missiles at Israeli civilians. They have sent homicide bombers to massacre innocent Israelis on buses, in schools, in synagogues, in restaurants, in hotels. They have desecrated wedding celebrations and Passover seders with acts of mass murder, turning days of joy into days of mourning. And they have killed or kidnapped Israeli soldiers.

These bloody acts were taken not to build a better life for the future of the Palestinians, but to wipe out any future for the Israelis and to destroy the Jewish State. Of course, at present, the greatest threats to Israel's security and its very existence are posed by the rogue regimes of Iran and Syria, as well as by their violent extremist proxies, such as Hamas and Hezbollah. This is the context for this important resolution before us today.

On June 25, 2006, as part of its longstanding war against the Jewish State, Hamas crossed into Israel and attacked an Israeli military post, killing two soldiers and kidnapping Gilad Shalit, who was then just 19 years old. For the last 4 years, Hamas has held Staff Sergeant Shalit hostage, denying him access to his family, access by competent medical personnel, as well as representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross. Hamas has forced young Shalit to appear in audio recordings and video recordings used to put pressure on Israel, and has mocked Shalit, mocked his family and his captivity in plays and cartoons and animated movies. Reports indicate that Shalit's health has declined as the result of his captivity.

Madam Speaker, Hamas, its fellow violent extremist group, Hezbollah, and their state sponsors not only are at war with Israel; they seek the destruction of the United States as well. Ahmadinejad has spoken of ``a world without America or Zionism,'' stating that ``you should know that this slogan, this goal, can certainly be achieved.'' And the Iranian regime is no stranger to taking hostages, including the 52 American hostages that Tehran held captive for 444 days. So when we consider Hamas's holding of Gilad Shalit in captivity, we must recognize this situation is part of the broader threat posed to both the United States and to Israel.

Madam Speaker, I have met with Staff Sergeant Shalit's father, who gave me his son's dog tags. And as a parent, I can only imagine the agony that the Shalit family is enduring. Indeed, anguish over Gilad Shalit's plight is felt by millions of Israelis who have parents, siblings, spouses, or children who are serving in the Israeli Defense Forces and who have spent many anxious nights hoping and praying for the safe return of their loved one. It resonates directly with many of us who have had children and other family members and friends who, in the service of our Nation, have been in harm's way.

As Israel continues to seek Gilad Shalit's freedom, we in the United States must continue to stand with our indispensable ally. For all of these reasons, Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 1359, which reaffirms our demand for Gilad Shalit's immediate and unconditional release.

I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, Mr. Ackerman and Mr. Burton, for introducing this resolution. I ask that the House join us in voting in favor of this resolution and in support of further measures to address the comprehensive threat posed on our Nation and to our ally Israel by Iran, by Syria, and by their militant proxies.

Among the steps the United States should take is to stop the failed policies of engagement with the Syrian and Iranian regimes which have not advanced our interests but has lent those dictatorships undeserved legitimacy. We should also continue to stand unequivocally with our ally Israel and oppose all efforts to deny Israel its sovereign right to self-defense--the very right that Staff Sergeant Gilad Shalit was exercising when he was kidnapped by Hamas.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe, an esteemed member of our Committee on Foreign Affairs and the coauthor of this resolution before us.

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

Madam Speaker, in discussions about the Iranian regime's pursuit of a nuclear weapons program, or its state sponsorship of violent extremists, the persecution that the thugs in Tehran inflict on ordinary Iranians, that is sometimes overlooked. This is particularly true on the international stage.

The United Nations Human Rights Council has condemned the democratic Jewish State of Israel over and over again for defending herself, but has not once condemned the Iranian regime's brutality against the Iranian people.

Iran, a regime that stones women to death, was elected by acclamation to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women. Let me repeat that again; it is so absurd, it is almost incomprehensible. It is incomprehensible. Iran, a regime that stones women to death, was elected by acclamation to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women. This is a Kafkaesque scenario.

So it is all the more important that we in this House stand in solidarity with the Iranian people and with all of those who support and defend human rights, support and defend democracy, support and defend freedom. We must also be clear and steadfast in describing and condemning the Iranian regime's human rights abuses, of which there are many.

Those in power in Tehran practice torture, flogging, rape, amputation, and murder. The regime conducts systematic, official discrimination against women, Baha'is, Christians, Jews, dissident Muslims, and many others. No one is exempt.

All seven members of the national Baha'i leadership in Iran remain in prison, where they have been held unjustly for 2 years and are on trial for trumped-up charges that potentially carry the death penalty. Gay people are hanged from cranes, even as their very existence in Iran is denied by Ahmadinejad.

Since the sham ``elections''--using the term loosely--1 year ago, the regime has intensified its repression, increasing restrictions on the freedom of religion, expression, association, assembly and the press.

What is left?

Thousands of protesters, dissidents, journalists have been arbitrarily detained or killed, with innocent people shot on the street, and the Stalinesque show-trials continue.

Even Iranians who succeed in fleeing their country are reportedly still in danger as agents of the Iranian regime threaten with death if they continue to speak out and protest human rights violations by Tehran.

Despite this repression, the people of Tehran continue to put their lives on the line in pursuit of freedom, and the United States and other responsible nations must stand with them. There are many further steps we can take to help at this critical time. Above all, we must do no harm. Negotiation with the regime legitimizes its illegitimate leaders and distracts attention from their repressive acts.

We must hit the regime where it hurts by fully implementing sanctions targeting the regime's vulnerabilities, both existing sanctions and the new ones that Congress will soon enact. The same refined petroleum products and other petro-dollars that bankrolled the regime's weapons program also bankrolled its repression of human rights. Requiring the immediate implementation and enforcement of comprehensive sanctions can help stop both of these threats.

We must also support those who seek human rights for Iran and monitor abuses, such as the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, which has actually seen its funding cut. And as the beacon of liberty and democracy to the entire world, the United States must do our duty to name and shame the guilty. Because we must take an all-of-the-above approach to this issue, I introduced H.R. 4649, the bipartisan Iran Human Rights Sanctions Act which was introduced in the Senate by John McCain and Joe Lieberman. That legislation requires the President to designate and sanction those who violate the human rights of Iranians. I am gratified that some versions of this bill will be included in the Iran sanctions conference report that Congress will soon consider.

And given the importance of human rights for the Iranian people and worldwide, I am proud to strongly support the resolution before us today, H. Res. 1457. This resolution marks the 1-year anniversary of the Iranian people's mass uprising against the regime's fraud, manipulation, and repression; and it also condemns the regime's brutality.

Furthermore, the resolution reaffirms our support for all Iranians who courageously struggle for freedom. It urges the immediate release of all political prisoners and calls for freedom and democracy for the people of Iran, including fair, democratic and independent elections.

I would like to thank the authors of this resolution, distinguished members of our Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe). This legislation builds on a resolution that Judge Poe introduced 6 months ago, as well as a resolution introduced by the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul). I appreciate the long-standing efforts of all of these Members on this important issue.

Ultimately, the purpose of this resolution reflects the words of Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, words that are salient to

any discussion on the status of human rights in Iran under that brutal regime: ``We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.''

With these words in mind, we must take sides. We must act together in support of the people of Iran. I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.

I yield back the balance of my time.