Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, during breast cancer awareness month, in solidarity with, and through the strength of, thousands of breast cancer survivors and victims throughout these United States.

I stand by my friend and colleague Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz whose fight with this disease is an incredible story of will and perseverance;

I stand by many longtime friends in our community who have been affected by this terrible disease;

And I stand by hundreds of thousands of women whom I will never know nor meet, but whose stories we already know all too well.

And though breast cancer affects both genders, it disproportionally targets women, with men being about 100 times less likely to be stricken with the disease.

And as women, our chances of developing invasive breast cancer at some time in our lives is incredibly high, by some counts a 1 in 8 chance.

This makes breast cancer the second most common cancer among women.

Almost everyone in this country unfortunately knows someone who has suffered from breast cancer.

Whether that person is your mother, sister, partner, or friend, the story is always heart wrenching.

Through efforts such as breast cancer awareness month, all of us work to bring about greater breast cancer education, prevention, diagnosis and treatment.

But it is stories of some of the brave women with this terrible disease that I want to share today.

Linda Gayle Burrowes never expected to be a statistic.

But for her 49th birthday she received the gift that would save her life.

A friend of hers insisted on giving Linda a mammogram; and the day after Linda's birthday, she was diagnosed with breast cancer.

She is a survivor because this angel sent gift caught the disease early, and Linda was determined that other women would not be like her, leaving their life up to chance.

Three months after her mastectomy, she started the breast cancer support and educational group ``Your Bosom Buddies'', which has meetings the 3rd Thursday of each month at the Women's Health Center at Baptist Hospital in my community.

There is also the story of Mary Lamberts, who is a 9-year breast cancer survivor.

Mary has a history of cancers on both sides of her family, so she always prepared for the worst on her check-ups.

But 90% of women diagnosed with breast cancer have no family history of the disease.

The diagnosis came after Mary had a mammogram, followed by an ultrasound that same day after her radiologist saw something suspicious.

During the surgery to follow, her doctor found multiple tumors.

Most of the tumors were removed but she had to undergo over 30 treatments of radiation, and remain on a regimen of powerful drugs for years afterwards.

Thankfully, many men and women do survive this terrible disease.

And no one knows the simple gifts in life like a survivor.

Rosa Andreu Vila was diagnosed with breast cancer 12 years ago and went through a lumpectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation and has mercifully been in remission.

She has told me that in the 12 years since her diagnosis, due to early detection and treatment, she has been able to see both of her sons graduate from college and be married, and is now a proud first- time grandmother.

These are stories of survivors, but new cases of breast cancer happen every day.

Dr. Frank Mave, a local doctor of osteopathy, is one of the newly diagnosed males with breast cancer and just had surgery this month.

He is only just now beginning his ``long and winding road'' with chemo and radiation, and we pray for him and all others who are on their way to being survivors.

These stories show that there is hope, and people are increasingly surviving breast cancer.

In the United States, breast cancer is becoming one of the most survivable cancers, if the disease is detected early.

And this is the point of breast cancer awareness month.

We must remain vigilant in our efforts to educate and diagnose and treat.

With these three pillars, we can and will save lives.

Let us make sure that we educate one another on the dangers of breast cancer and the need for routine checkups.

In memory of Congresswoman Jo Ann Davis, who passed away at the age of 57 while serving last Congress after a two-year battle with breast cancer;

For all men and women in my community and throughout the United States currently battling this terrible disease;

For my daughters, and my new baby granddaughter Morgan Elizabeth, I thank my friend and colleague Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership on this issue.

Her story serves as an inspiration to all.

Let us make sure our efforts to defeat this terrible disease continue at full force.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to recognize CDR Seth Foster Hudgins III, United States Navy. Commander Hudgins is retiring from the Navy after 22 years of honorable service as a commissioned officer. Commander Hudgins is the eldest son of Seth and Joy Hudgins of Cornwall, NY and is a 1987 graduate of the United States Naval Academy. Shortly after graduation, Commander Hudgins entered U.S. Navy undergraduate flight training, and in 1989, he earned Naval Aviator wings as a jet pilot.

Since that time, Commander Hudgins has served his country in many different capacities, most notably serving as his squadron's Operations Officer and Acting Executive Officer in Operation Enduring Freedom. Throughout his sterling service to our Nation, Commander Hudgins has been awarded the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, two Air Medals, and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, among others. He has accumulated over 3000 flight hours and more than 500 carrier landings. Commander Hudgins has served our great country with honor and distinction. I wish him and his wife Jennifer all the best as he retires from the Navy and continues to serve our nation at the Joint Interagency Task Force South in Key West.

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

Mr. Speaker, we gather today to honor the life and the accomplishments of Dr. Norman E. Borlaug, a pioneer in the field of the fight against world hunger. The world suffered a great loss with the recent passing of Dr. Borlaug, whose achievements in the field of agriculture have helped to feed millions of hungry people around the world. He passed from this world bearing the title of Father of the Green Revolution, his breakthrough advancement in wheat production and wheat adaptation having proven vital to those in need.

In rural areas around world, Dr. Borlaug's tireless efforts increased wheat output, helping to feed millions of starving people. Dr. Borlaug spent almost 30 years collaborating with scientists to alleviate world hunger through wheat development. In 1944 he accepted an appointment to the Cooperative Wheat Research and Production Program in Mexico, and it was there that he developed high-yielding, disease-resistant wheat, otherwise known as miracle wheat, opening the Green Revolution in global agriculture.

In 1970, Dr. Borlaug was awarded the distinguished Nobel Peace Prize for his work, the only person in the field of agriculture to be bestowed with such an honor.

He was later awarded such distinctions as the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal.

Dr. Borlaug's work was essential to those in need. He never wavered in this fight to fight world hunger, and he continued his efforts until his recent death. It is estimated that Dr. Borlaug's work helped to save over 1 billion people from starvation, but nevertheless, he warned that what he had helped to achieve was only a ``temporary success in man's war against hunger and deprivation,'' and he leaves behind a world in which many people still struggle to find enough to eat.

Mr. Speaker, challenges remain before us, but we can indeed be proud of the humanitarian work that Dr. Borlaug, an American patriot, demonstrated to the world. Today his Green Revolution stands as a singular success story for our efforts to assist those in dire need of our help around the world.

I am pleased to support this important resolution which honors the life of a true American hero, Dr. Norman Borlaug, whose incredible achievements in the fight against hunger should never be forgotten.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am so pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), a member of the Committee on Appropriations and the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), a member of the Agriculture, Small Business, and Judiciary Committees.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong and enthusiastic support of this resolution which calls for the release of one of the true heroes of the democracy movement in China. I want to thank our colleague from Idaho, Mr. Minnick, for introducing this measure and for agreeing to include portions of the similar resolution that was introduced 4 months ago beforehand by my friend, the chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, Mr. McCotter.

As a young professor, Liu Xiaobo served bravely as an advisor to the students at Tiananmen Square. For his courageous stand, he was detained and imprisoned by the Chinese Communist authorities. Now he has been detained again.

What led to Mr. Liu's detention this time was his promotion of Charter 08, which he signed last December on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Mr. Liu's court sentencing awaits, however, another anniversary. A military extravaganza to be staged by China's Communist Party will take place tomorrow. Tanks will roll in once again and the sounds of the boots of PLA soldiers will echo once more in Tiananmen Square as they did on that fateful June night two decades ago when democracy in China was killed.

Tomorrow's holiday, October 1, is remembered as the day in 1949 when Chairman Mao stood atop the Gate of Heavenly Peace and declared victory for Communist forces. After that, things were neither heavenly nor peaceful in China. Mr. Liu saw the need for reform.

He and his associates took their inspiration for a charter calling for greater freedom of expression for human rights and for free elections from the Charter 77 movement in Czechoslovakia. One of the architects of that movement, democracy advocate and former Czech President Vaclav Havel, had this to say about Mr. Liu and his efforts. In a December 19, 2008, opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Havel wrote, ``The Chinese Government should learn well the lesson of the Charter 77 movement that intimidation, propaganda campaigns, and repression are no substitute for reasoned dialogue. Only the immediate and unconditional release of Liu Xiaobo will demonstrate that, for Beijing, that this lesson has been learned.''

Our words should echo those of that greater fighter for democracy, Vaclav Havel. Beijing, open your eyes. That

flashy new weapon that you will display in tomorrow's military parade is no substitute for the torch light of the Goddess of Freedom and the Goddess of Democracy torn down in Tiananmen Square.

Use the October 1 movement, that anniversary, to immediately release democratic activist Liu Xiaobo. That would be the best way to commemorate China's national day.

I urge all of my colleagues to join us in vigorous support for this important resolution.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, it is fitting that we meet here today to consider this resolution, for tomorrow, as I said, will mark a day of infamy that has profoundly influenced the history of the world for the past 60 years. On October 1, 1949, Chairman Mao stood astride Tiananmen Gate in Beijing and declared a new communist China. That was the same square where 40 years later on a June 9 night in 1989, tanks and troops overran students, workers and the goddess of democracy, crushing their peaceful cries for democratic reform.

Tomorrow 200,000 PLA troops will march through Tiananmen Square. In a display worthy of the height of Stalinism in the former Soviet Union, Beijing's leader will show off the might of their latest military hardware. Foreign diplomats have been warned to close their windows and stay off their balconies as this parade passes by, however, for fear of being shot.

This is the new China which Mao proclaimed. Some say that we should hold our tongues with regard to the Beijing regime's actions because that regime holds America's pocketbook. Others say that the day of accommodation has arrived.

But I believe that this is a wrong, misguided, and immoral stance. We should stand tall for American values and with the goddess of democracy and not remain silent in the face of systematic human rights abuses. Next week, that ambassador of peace and serenity, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, will visit us in Washington. Every President since George Herbert Walker Bush has met with the Dalai Lama during his Washington visits, despite vigorous protests from Beijing that he is a splittist. President Obama should do no less.

Tomorrow I will join my voice with that of Liu Xiaobo and the other signers of the Charter 08 whom we honor in this resolution in calling for a new, free and democratic China. This is what we should commemorate on October 1, rather than 60 years of repression by the Communist regime in China.

Mr. Speaker, I'm now pleased to yield such time as he may consume to Mr. Cao, a member of the Homeland Security and Transportation Committees.

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

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

For half a century, the Antarctic Treaty has served as the indispensable element, allowing for the expansion of knowledge about that continent and its central role in the life of our planet. As stated in its preamble, the purpose of the treaty is to ensure that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes, the interests of science and the progress of all mankind.

That promise has been fulfilled, Mr. Speaker. The treaty is an enduring demonstration that international cooperation is not only possible across a broad and expanding range of subjects but also among an array of countries that in other areas have been strong competitors and even enemies.

The original seven signatories have since been joined by 40 more, which together represent the vast majority of the population of the world. The growing list of countries with active research efforts on the continent include the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Argentina, among others, underscoring the welcoming setting the treaty has created.

Once a mysterious and far-off land of seemingly marginal relevance to the world in which we live, half a century of scientific research has resulted in the universal recognition of Antarctica's global role. Although cooperation is not mandated, the treaty's promotion of the exchange of research, joint endeavors and free access to all areas of the continent and surrounding waters has resulted in an extraordinarily productive outpouring of knowledge about the continent and its direct impact on the life of our planet.

The treaty has been a laboratory for more than just science and research, however. It has also demonstrated that cooperation across a broad and expanding range of interests can occur without the need for international bureaucracy, bureaucrats or tribunals. The treaty itself was only the beginning. A long list of agreements followed that have promoted increasingly close cooperation and added additional protections for their continent, ranging from the convention for the conservation of Antarctic marine living resources to the protocol on environmental protection.

In this past half century, we have learned that although Antarctica can be an intimidating and even a harsh environment, it is also a fragile place which humans can easily degrade and even destroy. Thanks to the success of the Antarctic Treaty, we have gained countless benefits for all mankind, learned to care for a precious part of Earth and preserve this wonderful, irreplaceable inheritance for all generations to come.

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

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

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

I rise in strong support of S. 1707, the Enhanced Partnership With Pakistan Act of 2009.

The text before us is the result of negotiations between the House Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations Committees with substantial input from the Armed Services Committees and other committees of interest as well as the Departments of State and Defense.

Last week, the consensus text was introduced as a new bill, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent on September 24. While the Senate may have felt it appropriate to rush the bill through the process, many of our colleagues and I feel that a bill of this magnitude both in terms of its policy impact and the financial cost should have been considered under regular order, affording the opportunity for robust discussion, rather than being added to the suspension calendar.

Nevertheless, our focus is and must be on providing our civilian and military personnel the necessary resources and authorities to succeed in implementing a U.S. strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The bill before us addresses half of that equation: Pakistan.

Like its predecessor, it attempts to focus more U.S. resources and attention to rebuilding and making more professional the civilian institutions in Pakistan by authorizing $1.5 billion annually in nonmilitary assistance through fiscal year 2014.

Reminiscent of the House Republican substitute to the House version of this bill, which passed in June, the new text requires, before any economic assistance to Pakistan can be released, that the administration submit a Pakistan Assistance Strategy Report, including a description of the principal objectives of U.S. assistance, a detailed spending plan, and a plan for program monitoring. It further stipulates that no more than half the assistance may

be released until the Congress receives a certification from the administration that this significant expenditure of taxpayer dollars is materially contributing to our multifaceted goals related to Pakistan. If need be, these limitations are subject to a national interest waiver.

Perhaps the most significant changes in the text relate to security assistance. As Members will recall, the version considered by the House in June prompted a letter from Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and an associated letter from General Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, objecting to the degree of conditionality and limitations on security assistance to Pakistan which they felt would unduly constrain their efforts given the fluid and the dynamic environment that exists in Pakistan. I'm pleased to note, however, that Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen write that they now feel that the revised text ``addresses the key concerns'' that they had raised in their April 28, 2009, letter.

Specifically, Mr. Speaker, in section 202 the Department of Defense concerns with inflexibility, being overspecific, and conditionality with respect to funding for the International Military Education and Training and the Foreign Military Financing have been addressed through the use of ``such sums'' instead of specific numbers and ``a sense of Congress'' language instead of the binding percentage limitations.

In section 203, DOD concerns about inflexibility, conditionality, and potential counterproductive effects of certain limitations on security assistance have been addressed with more balanced language on nonproliferation issues as well as counterterrorism. Issues relating to the F-16 program of Pakistan have also been addressed.

In section 204, DOD concerns about the consistency of language authorizing the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capabilities Fund with the fiscal year 2009 Supplemental and the State/DOD agreement on transfer of funds, these issues have been addressed. The language is now consistent with that bill and prior understanding.

In section 205, DOD concerns about inflexibility and conditionality with respect to a requirement for civilian control of certain assistance have been addressed through better language and strong dual key waiver authority for Secretary of State and Defense.

I thank all of the authorities for making these changes. I thank Mr. Berman for his flexibility.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Trade, who has been working hard on this bill from the very beginning.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Dr. Paul.

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), a valuable member of the Committee on Appropriations.

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

I'm pleased that in this bill overly prescriptive reporting and related requirements have been replaced by more appropriate and time- limited provisions for Pakistan strategy reports, for accountability, and for monitoring of assistance.

Robust accountability provisions are included and are vital to reassure the American taxpayer that their moneys are being well-spent, and this is particularly the case for Pakistan, where many Pakistanis and groups, like Transparency International, are deeply concerned about the integrity of high-level officials in that country.

Mr. Speaker, of all the foreign policy challenges facing the United States, stabilizing and transforming and reforming Pakistan may be one of the most daunting. The good news is that leaders in Islamabad have shown increased willingness to confront those militants who have targeted the Pakistani State from bases in the Northwest Frontier Province and from South Waziristan.

A number of militant leaders have been killed or captured, most prominently the leader of the Pakistani Taliban.

SWAT and other conflict-affected areas of the Northwest Frontier Province are stabilizing. Although some progress has been achieved, much remains to be done.

Pakistan and Afghanistan are part of a wider theater of operations and, despite important differences, must be considered jointly, as the administration itself suggested following the conclusion of a comprehensive strategic review of Af-Pak policy this March.

Suddenly, however, President Obama has apparently decided to rethink the entire strategy in Afghanistan after his hand-picked new commander there, General Stanley McChrystal, warned that the war could be lost if he doesn't get more troops in the next 12 months.

The stunning magnitude of this reversal was highlighted in an article, an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal of September 22.

The author Leslie Gelb, a former Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, columnist and president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote:

``I'm lost on President Barack Obama's Afghanistan policy, along with most of Congress and the U.S. military. Not quite 8 months ago, Mr. Obama pledged to `defeat' al Qaeda in Afghanistan by transforming that country's political and economic infrastructure, by training Afghan forces and adding 21,000 U.S. forces for starters.

``He proclaimed Afghanistan's strategic centrality to prevent Muslim extremism from taking over Pakistan, an even more vital Nation because of its nuclear weapons. And a mere 3 weeks ago, he punctuated his commitments by proclaiming that Afghanistan is a `war of necessity,' not one of choice. White House spokesmen reinforced this by promising that the President would `fully resource' the war.''

Leslie Gelb goes on, ``Yet less than 1 week ago, Mr. Obama said the following about troop increases: `I'm going to take a very deliberative process in making those decisions. There is no immediate decision pending on resources, because one of the things that I'm absolutely clear about is you have to get the strategy right and then make a determination about resources.' ''

Gelb points out, ``Americans are now confused and caught somewhere between remembering the President's insistence on Afghanistan's importance to U.S. security and rapidly rising pressure from his party to bring the troops home.''

Mr. Speaker, if the U.S. is going to prevail against al Qaeda and the Taliban and win in Afghanistan, the administration must take immediate steps to fully implement the strategy without any further vacillating or delays.

Thus, while today we prepare to vote strongly in support of S. 1707 and, in the words of Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen, ``strongly signal to the Pakistani people our long-term commitment to partnering with them to combat terrorism and extremism,'' I must ask: What about Afghanistan? How much more time will pass before General McChrystal is provided the resources and the personnel that he deems necessary to succeed in Afghanistan?

As for Pakistan, we join with the executive branch on a bipartisan basis to support policies that will help our friends there transform their country into a stable and prosperous democracy that will support U.S. interests in the region, that opposes militancy within and outside its borders, commits to a secure Afghanistan, and will maintain responsible controls over its nuclear weapons capability.

This bill helps us to achieve those objectives, and I urge its support.

And with that, I yield back the balance of our time.

Madam Speaker, the Miami-Dade Heart Association will hold its Miami-Dade Start! Heart Walk this Saturday, October 2, at the beautiful Tropical Park. Miami's walk is just one of nearly 400 similar events across our great country that will help the tremendous lifesaving activities of the American Heart Association. This major undertaking is designed to promote physical activity and heart-healthy living in a fun-loving atmosphere for the whole family. More than 1 million walkers from around the Nation are expected to participate in this massive effort to help those afflicted by the Nation's number one and the Nation's number three killers, heart disease and stroke.

The main reason behind the walk is to raise awareness that physical inactivity significantly increases the risk of heart disease and stroke. Seventy percent of Americans don't get enough exercise; and as a result, our waistbands have expanded and so have the number of preventable illnesses and health care costs.

Madam Speaker, both locally and nationally, the Heart Association is

showing the way to help improve our Nation's health care through this momentous endeavor. Let's all start walking this Saturday.

Madam Speaker, I am here to speak on a different topic, on U.S. assistance to Libya and the need for U.N. and foreign aid reform in our budgeting process.

Madam Speaker, just as the convicted extremist of Pan Am Flight 103 was being given a hero's welcome in Libya and just prior to the Libyan leader's own bizarre 93-minute diatribe against all freedom-loving nations before the U.N. General Assembly last week, the Congress was receiving a notification from our State Department that it intended to provide $2.5 million in economic support funds for Libya. That's unbelievable.

The State Department plans also to send 400,000 of those dollars to organizations run by members of the Qaddafi

family; $200,000 of this is to go to the Qaddafi Development Foundation for assisting indigenous NGOs identify potential for reform. Reform in Libya? You have got to be kidding. This foundation is not a nongovernment organization. It has direct links to Libyan Government and is actually run by the son of Qaddafi. For those of who don't know Qaddafi's second oldest son, he is the one who personally escorted the man responsible for the tragedy of Pan Am Flight 103 from Scotland upon his release back to Libya on his father's personal jet.

The foundation run by Qaddafi's second eldest son is the very group that was used by the Libyan regime to channel funds to compensate American victims of Libyan-sponsored attacks, including victims of Pan Am Flight 103. State Department funding for this foundation may, in fact, serve as a backdoor replenishment of funds used by Libya to compensate our victims of Libyan-sponsored attacks.

Turning to a separate $200,000 slush fund proposed under the heading of ``Inclusive Economic Law and Property Rights: Promoting Women's Economic Opportunities,'' the State Department has indicated that the anticipated implementing partners will be the United Nations Development Programme and an organization run by Qaddafi's daughter. Qaddafi's daughter also serves as the UNDP's goodwill ambassador to Libya, so she gets two opportunities to directly benefit from U.S. Government programs in Libya at our taxpayers' expense.

The role of the United Nation Development Programme is very disturbing. It has been the center of several major corruption scandals in recent years. It reportedly cannot account for millions of American dollars that it received in Afghanistan. It also allegedly funneled hard currency to the North Korean regime while Kim Jong Il was consolidating his nuclear program. UNDP then retaliated against the whistleblower who uncovered this wrongdoing.

So I ask you, was funding for the Qaddafi family and a notoriously unaccountable UNDP what Congress had in mind when it appropriated funds to support what they call promotion of democracy and human rights in Libya? Oh, my gosh. Absolutely not.

Unfortunately, the Libya aid program presents just one more example of the need for broad, comprehensive reform of the United States foreign assistance program. Our U.S. foreign assistance can go a long way in improving people's lives while promoting our most cherished ideals of freedom and human rights. However, when administered poorly where unaccounted foreign governments, international organizations and bureaucrats are the beneficiaries, then our foreign aid programs only serve to undermine our very own interests.

It is time for us to get serious about reforming our foreign aid system and about effectively vetting our programs and partners.

Toward this end, Madam Speaker, I have proposed two separate pieces of legislation: H.R. 1062, the Foreign Assistance Partner Vetting Act, and H.R. 557, the United Nation's Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act, and I hope that we can get those bills heard forthwith.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

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

I also rise in strong support of this resolution addressing the recent natural disaster of typhoon winds and mudslides that struck Taiwan. This resolution expresses our sincere condolences to our Taiwanese friends who lost loved ones, homes, and businesses due to the devastation which struck the island on August 8. At least 602 people were killed, 81 others are missing, and over 190,000 homes were damaged or destroyed in the fury of the storm and in the aftermath of mudslides. Over 100 inches of rain turned streams into raging rivers which destroyed everything in their path. Whole villages were inundated by floodwaters and mud.

But, Mr. Speaker, the people of the United States feel those sympathies even more deeply today at a time when so many of our fellow Americans are suffering from tragic and deadly flooding in Georgia and Tennessee, and our deepest condolences go to our neighbors in the South.

On Taiwan, it is noteworthy that for the first time since official ties with Taiwan were severed in 1979, the United States dispatched humanitarian relief to the island to aid the victims of the typhoon. In response to this critical emergency for our Taiwan friends, the U.S. Marine Corps, based in Okinawa, sent two C-130s to southern Taiwan to deliver relief supplies. The amphibious transport ship USS Denver was also dispatched to the area and provided helicopters to engage in humanitarian operations as well. Thus, these deeply tragic circumstances served as a means to demonstrate the enduring, the unbreakable ties which exist between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan.

In this 30th anniversary year of the Taiwan Relations Act, Mr. Speaker, the United States can do no less than to continue to aid the people of Taiwan in their hour of need. I urge all of my

colleagues to join us in vigorous support of this timely and heartfelt resolution.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart).

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author of this important resolution.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of H.R. 3593. I want to thank my good friend from California (Mr. Royce), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, for introducing this measure.

Thirteen years ago next week, on September 29, 1996, Radio Free Asia first went on the air with a Mandarin language broadcast into China. Today,

RFA broadcasts into China, Tibet, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Burma in nine local languages and dialects. It provides timely, objective news to people who are denied the benefit of a free press in their own homeland.

Not only did Congress create and fund that surrogate broadcasting service, we also urged RFA to increase its transmissions to particularly vulnerable populations, such as the people of North Korea, as we did in the North Korea Human Rights Act of 2004 and last year's reauthorization of that law. We are proud and supportive of the good work that Radio Free Asia continues to do.

While the authorization of appropriations for RFA was previously extended, it appears that the statutory section detailing RFA's grant- making authority was inadvertently omitted from that reauthorization, leaving it to expire at the end of this month. Therefore, we have this one-sentence bill before us today to correct that oversight. In the time when we see bills of over 1,000 pages in length which many have not read, it is wonderful to see a very simple bill, a brief bill, but a very important bill.

Both Republican and Democrat versions of The Foreign Relations Authorization Act introduced in this Congress include a provision that would remove the sunset of RFA authority, making it permanent. I look forward to working toward a long-term reauthorization of the RFA on a bipartisan basis during the year ahead. I urge support for this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the author of this legislation and the individual behind the United States' international broadcasting of Radio Free Asia, Mr. Royce of California.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), a cosponsor of this measure and the ranking member of the Select Committee on Intelligence who obviously has deep roots, having been born in the Netherlands.

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

The United States and the Netherlands are strong allies. The roots of our close relationship stretch back for more than 100 years before our Nation's independence. In September of 1609, Henry Hudson explored a vast river and territory in what is now New York State while on an expedition for the Dutch East India Company. On his return from that expedition, Hudson wrote such glowing reports on the promise of the lands that he had discovered that Dutch citizens were inspired to cross the Atlantic and establish the New Netherland settlement. The values of those early Dutch settlers--values of entrepreneurship, democracy, tolerance and hard work--continue to influence our society today 400 years later.

The friendship between the young United States of America and the Netherlands was tested when America was on the brink of bankruptcy due to the financial cost incurred in its fight for independence and reached out to the Netherlands for financial support. Ultimately, the Dutch provided the United States with a loan that proved vital to ensuring the survival of our young Nation. Subsequently, in another strong sign of friendship, the Netherlands was the first European country to diplomatically recognize the new United States of America.

Many of us have grown up with the story of brave young Hans Brinker who saved the people of the Netherlands by sticking his finger in the dam to prevent a devastating flood. Well, what many people don't know is that this story was actually made famous in 1865 by American author Mary Mapes Dodge to illustrate for American children the characteristic values of bravery, resourcefulness and self-sacrifice, associated with the people of the Netherlands. In this story, Hans Brinker stood alone. However, the history of the Dutch-American relationship demonstrates our commitment that should either be in need, the other will stand by them. This commitment has truly been in evidence whenever the Dutch and Americans have fought side by side through the second World War, the Korean War, the Gulf Wars, and numerous other global efforts. Today we're working together in Afghanistan and in Iraq to prevent extremists from unleashing devastating violence against the people of those countries and our own.

I am pleased to support this resolution today, which marks the 400th anniversary of the discovery of the Hudson River and the beginning of the deep and lasting friendship between the Netherlands and the United States of America.

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

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

I rise in support of H.R. 2131, introduced by my good friend Ambassador Watson. In terms of commerce, culture, military power, and just about any other field of human endeavor, our Nation is a key actor in the complex world of the 21st century. Sometimes, however, our goals and our intentions are misunderstood or are deliberately misinterpreted by those who mean us harm. People cannot fully understand American interests without understanding American ideals, economic and personal freedom, democracy and human rights; and people will not fully grasp those American ideals without having a sense of the diverse genius of the American people whose resolve, good will and generosity constitute the true heart of our Nation. We cannot take that knowledge for granted, Mr. Speaker. Showing the true face of America to the people of the world is the lofty aim of our U.S. public diplomacy efforts.

In the wrenching aftermath of the Second World War, Congress created the United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy in 1948.

According to its current charter, the Commission ``appraises U.S. Government activities intended to understand, inform and influence foreign publics.''

For example, just last year, the Commission issued a 36-page report critiquing and making recommendations for personnel practices of the current Public Diplomacy bureaucracy in areas such as recruitment, training and integration into broader State Department operations.

This short bill before us today will keep the Commission's legislative authorization from expiring at the end of this month. This will give the Foreign Affairs Committee and this Congress another year to assess the work and the efficacy of the Commission and its relationship with our broader Public Diplomacy apparatus before undertaking a more comprehensive, longer-term reform effort.

I would like to again thank my colleague from California, Ambassador Watson, for introducing this measure, and I support its adoption by this House.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 74 notes the importance of the goals and ideals of a decade of action for road safety. As this measure reminds us, 40,000 people in the United States and 1.3 million people worldwide die in road crashes each year, and many more are injured. Road crashes are the leading cause of death globally for young people. In light of these facts, we ought to explore ways to do more to help prevent road crash-related deaths and injuries.

This resolution expresses support for the goals of a decade of action for road safety. It urges the Obama administration, the Department of State, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to set ambitious road traffic casualty reduction targets for American citizens. Finally, it urges the administration to work with nations around the world to achieve the goals and ideals of a decade of action for road safety.

I would like to thank my colleague and good friend from Florida (Mr. Wexler) for introducing this important measure, which I am pleased to support.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I would like to congratulate Mr. Wexler for introducing this resolution to enhance global road safety and to reduce the risk of road crash deaths and injuries around the world by fostering partnerships in cooperation between governments, public and private sectors and within civil society. I support the measure.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, Ambassador Susan Rice, our Permanent Representative to the United Nations, has emphasized that the U.S. is ``taking a new approach'' to the U.N. as part of its broader ``new era of engagement.'' Instead of protecting the investment of our tax dollars, instead of conditioning our contributions on real reform, the U.S. has adopted a strategy of ``money now, maybe reform later.''

At the U.N. General Assembly as it begins its new session this week, there is perhaps no better time to evaluate the effectiveness thus far of this so-called ``new approach.''

Well, let's see what has resulted. In March, the U.S. sent an observer to participate in the U.N.'s so-called Human Rights Council, which is dominated by dictatorships like China, Cuba and Saudi Arabia, and is notoriously anti-Israel.

Despite U.S. engagement, the Council stayed true to form. What did they do? Overwhelmingly passed five separate resolutions condemning Israel, passing no resolutions condemning human rights violations by the regimes in Iran and Syria, Sudan, Cuba, Zimbabwe or many other dictatorships.

True to form, the Council-appointed panel recently released a report accusing Israel of ``war crimes'' and ``possibly, crimes against humanity'' for defending its citizens against rocket and mortar fire from Islamic militants in Gaza.

When it comes to the Council's biases and backwardness, there is no end in sight. There is no change in sight. Yet, the U.S. silently nods and sends millions of our taxpayer dollars, with no questions asked.

There is also UNRWA, the United Nations Relief Works Agency, the U.N.'s discredited, biased agency for Palestinian refugees. This year alone, we have given UNRWA a record of $260 million. In return, UNRWA continues to compromise its strictly humanitarian mandate by engaging in propaganda against Israel and in favor of Hamas. In fact, UNRWA's head says she doesn't even consider Hamas to be a Foreign Terrorist Organization, and her predecessor even admitted that members of Hamas were on the payroll of UNRWA, saying ``I don't see that as a crime.''

Deputy Secretary of State Jacob Lew testified before our Foreign Affairs Committee in May, and he said

UNRWA's activities received ``the highest level of scrutiny'' by the State Department. But we don't even require UNRWA to vet its employees and aid recipients through the U.S. watch lists.

Turning to the U.N. General Assembly, Madam Speaker, it remains silent in the face of intense repression and violent attacks by the Iranian regime against peaceful demonstrators. Yet, in late June, it moved swiftly to condemn and isolate the constitutional democratic government of Honduras for acting in accordance with and in protection of the rule of law.

As for the leadership of the new session of the General Assembly, it's a ``who's who'' of the world's worst regimes. The President? The former foreign minister of Libya. One of the vice-presidents? From Sudan. A vice chair of the legal committee? Iran. But the U.S. has said nothing as such rogue regimes were selected for leadership positions at the U.N.

Administration officials have said, ``The U.N. is essential to our efforts to galvanize concerted actions that make Americans safer and more secure.'' Libya, Sudan, Iran? Are you feeling secure now?

One of the greatest threats to the security of our Nation and an existential threat to our ally Israel comes from the Iranian regime and its nuclear program. This week, for the first time, a President of the United States will chair a meeting of the U.N. Security Council and will have a golden opportunity to raise the threat of Iran on the world stage. The Council will even be holding a special summit on the general issue of nuclear nonproliferation.

Yet the actions of specific countries such as Iran will be ignored. The U.S. will not use its presidency of the Council this month to push for increased sanctions on Iran or any other regime that pursues nuclear capabilities or sponsors violent extremist groups.

The International Atomic Energy Agency continues to provide nuclear technical assistance to Iran and Syria, and the U.S. remains silent.

The U.N. Development Program is accused of misusing funds in Zimbabwe, in Afghanistan and in North Korea, to name a few, and the U.S. continues to provide them with hundreds of millions of dollars every year in funding. No strings attached.

Madam Speaker, enough is enough. Let's put U.S. taxpayer dollars to work for the American people, and not for the U.N., where the inmates run the asylum.

Today marks a historic event for the Nation's most significant Federal job-training agency. The Job Corps celebrates its 45th anniversary today, recognizing the agency's many years of service to America during which it has helped launch the careers of nearly 3 million disadvantaged youths.

As part of the National Job Corps Association's celebration of this important anniversary, I'm proud to cosponsor Congressman Jerry Moran's resolution, H. Con. Res. 163, to designate September 23 as National Job Corps Day.

Since 1964, the Job Corps has created a network of 123 Job Corps centers in 48 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. As part of the 45th anniversary celebration, I am pleased that one of my area's Job Corps interns, Esmeralda Sanchez, will be shadowing me tomorrow.

Additionally, my local Homestead Job Corps center is hosting an open house event on Thursday, October 1, for the entire south Florida community to attend.

Both locally and nationally, the Job Corps has definitely benefited America by producing payrolls for our country.