Floor Statements

I thank my dear friend Ms. Ros- Lehtinen and also my friend Mr. Engel for their help in getting this resolution to the floor and their strong support of this important resolution.

I take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate the United Kingdom's new Prime Minister, David Cameron, as he, as head of the Conservative Party, forms a new government with the Liberal Democrats. We wish him and all of the British people all the best. It's important that we in Congress take the time to recognize that great friend and ally of the United States. It is important that we recognize the special friendship and all that the United Kingdom has done to stand with the United States.

This resolution recognizes the special relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States. It points out the strong influence that English philosophers, economists, jurists and other leaders have had on American political thought, on the United States legal system and on our government. This strong special relationship, founded on our shared history, continues into the modern day. The United Kingdom has repeatedly demonstrated the strength of its camaraderie with the United States.

Within the last decade, the United Kingdom joined forces with us against the Taliban as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, and U.K. soldiers have fought alongside American soldiers in Iraq. The United Kingdom has suffered a tragic loss of life as a result. As of March, 273 U.K. military and civilian personnel have given their lives in Afghanistan, and 179 have given the last full measure of devotion in Iraq.

I am very proud, Mr. Speaker, to have introduced this resolution, highlighting the strong ties that bind our countries together. The United Kingdom is a great friend and ally of the United States. Reflecting on our relationship, Winston Churchill said, ``In this century of storm and tragedy, I contemplate with high satisfaction the constant factor of the interwoven and upward progress of our peoples. Our comradeship and our brotherhood in war were unexampled. We stood together, and because of that fact, the free world now stands. Nor has our partnership any exclusive nature: the Atlantic community is a dream that can well be fulfilled to the detriment of none and to the enduring benefit and honor of the great democracies.''

During the most trying times in the history of the United States, we have had no truer friend than the United Kingdom. I sincerely hope that our futures will continue to reflect our histories, deepen our friendship and continually refresh our commitment to the shared values of the rule of law and democratic principles. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important and, I believe, timely resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me the time and Mr. Quigley for introducing this important resolution.

The Community of Democracies, a global intergovernmental coalition of over 100 democratic states, has proven its support for the promotion of democracy in civil society over the decade since its founding.

I would like to take this opportunity to highlight, as Ms. Ros- Lehtinen appropriately mentioned before, the leadership of the Republic of Lithuania, which took over the presidency of the Community of Democracies in July 2009. Lithuania has shown remarkable leadership in pressing forward with the Community's agenda of promoting democracy, human rights, and freedom in oppressed lands such as Burma, Belarus, and Cuba.

Under the guidance of Ambassador Zygimantas Pavilionis, chief coordinator of Lithuania's presidency of the Community of Democracies, the Community created a Parliamentary Forum in March of this year. I have been impressed by Ambassador Pavilionis' exceptional leadership and commitment to strengthening the role of the Community of Democracies in fulfilling its mission of promoting democratic institutions and civil society.

In March of this year, I was privileged to attend the convening meeting of the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies in Vilnius, Lithuania. At the first meeting of the Parliamentary Forum, Emanuelis Zingeris, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Seimas of Lithuania, was elected as the first president of the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies. Mr. Zingeris is a charismatic and brilliant leader who will doubtless be an effective president of the Parliamentary Forum throughout his term.

Also at the Parliamentary Forum, I had the great honor of being elected one of the seven vice presidents of the new entity, along with fellow vice presidents Michal Tomasz Kaminski, Polish member of the European Parliament and chairman of the European Conservatives and Reformists in the European Parliament; Michael Gahler, German member of the European Parliament of the Group of the European People's Party; Alexandr Vondra, a senator from the Czech Republic; Adriana Gonzalez Carrillo, a senator of the Republic of Mexico; David Kilgour, former member of Parliament and a well-known human rights activist in Canada; and David Bakradze, speaker of the Parliament of Georgia.

Notably, the Parliamentary Forum's first adopted resolution at its convening meeting on March 12, 2010, called for the support of Cuba's pro-democracy movement. I have a copy of that resolution, Mr. Speaker here. I will insert it into the Record.

And the Parliamentary Forum's international solidarity, as demonstrated by this resolution, a strong and very appropriate, well- written resolution that, for example, honors, and I read from it, Cuban pro-democracy fighters such as the martyr Orlando Zapata Tamayo and expresses its admiration for the efforts of other heroes such as Guillermo Farinas. This is a concrete, specific demonstration of genuine solidarity by the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies with the suffering people of Cuba and the freedom fighters who, within Cuba, are struggling to bring democracy and freedom to that land.

Orlando Zapata Tamayo was assassinated by the Cuban dictatorship, and he died after over 80 days on a hunger strike protesting the tortures that he was continuously subjected to as a political prisoner.

And Guillermo Farinas is, as we speak, on a hunger strike in Cuba. This

institution, the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies, expressed its solidarity with these Cuban rights fighters, fighters for freedom. And in that way, demonstrated its genuine commitment to furthering democratic institutions and assisting those who are fighting for freedom.

The resolution today, Mr. Speaker, that will be passed by the Congress of the United States in support of commending the Community of Democracies on its 10th anniversary is timely. I wholeheartedly support it. I commend the Community of Democracies for 10 years of leadership, and I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this resolution.

Again, thank you, Mr. Engel. Thank you Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. This is an important and timely resolution. These are friends of freedom that we're commending today, an institution that, as Ms. Ros-Lehtinen pointed out, is not there for cocktail parties or press releases. And it doesn't allow itself to be tarnished, like abominable institutions such as the so-called Human Rights Council of the United Nations, to be tarnished by, in effect, defending tyrannies. The Community of Democracies is that, a community of democracies that stands for and believes in freedom and democracy. That's why it's appropriate to commend them on their 10th anniversary.

The Community of Democracies Parliamentary Forum

resolution calling for support of Cuba's pro-democracy movement, The

convening meeting, 2010 March 12

Whereas the pro-democracy movement in Cuba has grown at a

rapid pace over the last three years, and specific

expressions of the movement are evident today in the

explosion of bloggers on the island, independent journalists,

musicians, artists, writers, and others, who are using their

talents to denounce the atrocities of the dictatorship all

while putting forth new ideas for the transition to

democracy;

Whereas there are still extraordinary obstacles to overcome

such as the continued repression by the totalitarian

dictatorship, extremely limited access to the Internet and

``texting'' capabilities, and a lack of a coherent message of

solidarity from the international community;

Whereas the dictatorship is fearful of the growth of the

pro-democracy movement;

Whereas the message of the Movement is coherent and clear

in demanding freedom for all Cuban political prisoners,

beginning with those who are gravely ill inside the prison,

freedom of expression and free, fair multi-party elections

with international supervision;

Whereas this common position of the Cuban pro-democracy

movement requires greater recognition, dissemination and

solidarity on the part of the Community of Democracies;

Whereas now more than ever the Cuban pro-democracy movement

requires that the democratic community takes concrete steps

to demonstrate its solidarity; Now, therefore be it

Resolved, That the Community of Democracies Parliamentary

Forum--

condemns the brutality of the Cuban regime against Cuban

political prisoners;

expresses its full support for the Cuban pro-democracy

movement;

honors Cuban pro-democracy fighters such as the martyr

Orlando Zapata Tamayo and expresses its admiration for the

efforts of other heroes such as Guillermo Farifias;

calls for the immediate release of all Cuban political

prisoners and free multiparty elections in Cuba; and

calls on the democratic community to take concrete steps in

demonstrating their solidarity with the Cuban pro-democracy

movement by providing humanitarian and technological

assistance to the pro-democratic movement, urging certain

foreign diplomatic posts in Havana to strengthen contacts

with pro-democratic activists on the island, encouraging

foreign dignitaries to visit Cuba for the sole purpose of

meeting with pro-democratic activists, and looking for

opportunities to reiterate and support the common position of

the Cuban pro-democracy movement in the international

community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor an admirable educator and scholar from Bogota, Colombia, Dr. Rodrigo Noguera Calderon. During his long and highly acclaimed professional career after receiving a doctorate in law with a specialization in socioeconomic sciences from the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, he has been an exceptional jurist and academician.

His humanistic formation led him to defend from the outset the values and principles of western civilization, the defense of which is today manifested in the formation of professionals educated with the same principles.

As a corollary of his humanistic formation, Dr. Noguera has been an ardent defender of democracy and of its liberties, and he has been a fighter against totalitarian and so-called ``populist'' regimes which seek to destabilize democratic governments.

Dr. Noguera has also stood out for his unwavering and constant defense of the principles on which human rights are based and for the correct application of international norms that regulate them against those who, in the name of human rights, violate the very principles they say they seek to protect. To further this cause, Dr. Noguera established the Human Rights Institute in collaboration with academic institutions on three continents.

Regarding the United States of America, his positions and those of the Universidad Sergio Arboleda, which is the university founded in 1984 by his father, Rodrigo Noguera Laborde, and at which he has presided since 2003, have always been of friendship and in defense of the postulates and values of this great Nation.

The Universidad Sergio Arboleda was the main academic institution in Colombia that supported and assisted with the entire negotiation process of the Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Colombia.

The Universidad Sergio Arboleda also maintains very close relationships, by means of specific shared programs and projects, with many American universities, such as Florida International University, Florida Atlantic University, Georgetown University, American University, and the New York University School of Law. The Universidad Sergio Arboleda was a leader in the creation of joint degree programs with American universities. It was also a leader in other innovative and groundbreaking agreements, which have benefited both the United States and Colombia.

The Congressional Hispanic Leadership Institute, of which I am honored to chair, will also enter into an agreement of collaboration with the Universidad Sergio Arboleda.

Dr. Noguera has held very prestigious public-sector positions by presidential appointment, including supervisor of corporations, national electoral council judge, and associate judge of the National Constitutional Court of Colombia. He was presently named by Colombian President Alvaro Uribe as a member of the Committee on Political Reform. He has received many important distinctions, including the Order of Democracy Simon Bolivar in the degree of Cruz Gran Caballero, which is one of the highest civilian honors of Colombia, granted by the Colombian House of Representatives.

For my late father, for my brothers, and for me and my wife, our friendship with Rodrigo Noguera and his wife, Zayda Barrero de Noguera, is an extraordinary honor.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to, first of all, thank my friend, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), for the time; and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The underlying legislation, H.R. 2499, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009, is a fair and appropriate way for the people of Puerto Rico to express themselves at the ballot box regarding the critical issue of their permanent status. The legislation would allow a plebiscite whereby the people of Puerto Rico will decide whether to maintain their current political status or have a different status. If a majority favors a different status, the Government of Puerto Rico would be authorized to conduct a second plebiscite among three nonterritorial status options recognized under United States and international law: independence, United States statehood, or sovereignty in association with the United States. They would, obviously, have to be worked out between sovereign Puerto Rico and sovereign United States.

The legislation does not dictate an outcome for the people of Puerto Rico. Congress will not take sides by voting for this legislation. Congress will only be asking the Puerto Rican people to vote on the issue of their permanent status. This process is absolutely respectful of the Puerto Rican people's right to decide their future status.

I wish to commend Resident Commissioner Pierluisi and my dear friend and former colleague, Governor Luis Fortuno, for extraordinary leadership on this issue. Both of them have earned the admiration of both sides of the aisle in the United States Congress and deserve commendation for their leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that some Members of Congress have concerns that the results of the election would be automatically implemented. I was discussing with my colleague, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, some falsehoods that are being said on radio and other media that the vote today is one that would set up a process that would automatically be implemented. That is not the case. The results of the plebiscites are nonbinding on Congress. So in order for the results to be put into effect, whatever the results of the referendum would be, Congress would need to debate again and, again, pass legislation. In other words, new legislation.

My position with regard to the status of Puerto Rico is that the people of Puerto Rico have the right to decide the political and legal status of their wonderful island through a fair, neutral, as well as federally recognized, plebiscite. I have ultimate admiration for the people of Puerto Rico. They are a wonderful people. If the people of Puerto Rico ultimately vote to request admission to the United States of America as a State of the American Union, there will be no stronger defender of their right to be the 51st American State than me. If they vote to remain in their current status, there will be no stronger defender of their decision than me. And if they vote for independence, there will be no stronger defender of their decision than me. This legislation is a self-determination vehicle, and I support self- determination. I support democracy everywhere. The Puerto Rican people should be able to decide their permanent status themselves.

The House last addressed this issue in 1998. I remember, Mr. Speaker, that I had the honor of chairing that debate in the House when H.R. 856, the United States-Puerto Rico Political Status Act, after much leadership and advocacy by Resident Commissioner Romero-Barcelo, was brought to the floor under a Republican majority.

I was a member of the Rules Committee at that time, and I am proud to say that our majority, the Republican majority, allowed that bill to proceed under an open rule, a rule that allows Members from both parties to have their amendments to the legislation debated on the House floor without having to get approval from the Rules Committee. This is an important issue, and if there's ever been legislation that deserves an open debate process, it's this legislation.

I remind the House of the process that we used when we were the majority because today the current majority has decided to restrict debate on this issue, on this very same issue that we allowed an open debate process on in 1998. And not only on this legislation, but on every piece of legislation brought before this Congress. This majority has not allowed any open rules, any open debate process in over 2\1/2\ years. Since they regained the majority, they have allowed only one open rule, apart from appropriations bills. And even on appropriations bills, they have restricted debate.

Now I disagree with some of the amendments that were presented before the Rules Committee yesterday, and if, by chance, the majority would have allowed their consideration by the full Congress, I would have voted against those amendments. I may have even debated against those amendments. But just because I disagree with amendments that were brought before the Rules Committee, asking the Rules Committee to allow consideration by the full House does not mean that I believe that those Members of the House do not deserve the right to be heard. I believe the House should be allowed to work its will.

Now, unlike the current majority, I believe in open debate. Let amendments stand or fall on their merits. Just about every week I have the honor to come to the floor of this House to help manage rules debates on behalf of my party, and pretty much every time I come to the floor, I criticize the current majority for systematically blocking open debate with ruthless efficiency on every bill that we consider. Even on appropriations bills, which have long been brought to the floor under a tradition of open rules, they blocked debate. Today they could have easily upheld the tradition set by the Republican majority to allow an open debate on the extremely important issue of Puerto Rico's political status; yet the current majority, they can't bear to do something so abhorrent to them, to permit an open debate process. They cling, Mr. Speaker, they cling to their modus operandi, restricting debate, restricting debate. So they've done so again today.

Now, that doesn't negate the historic nature of what the Congress of the United States is doing today. Today whatever the outcome of this legislation, Congress will send its greeting,

its support and admiration for the wonderful people of ``La Isla del Encanto,'' Puerto Rico.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it's my privilege to yield 3 minutes to my dear friend and colleague from Florida (Ms. Ros- Lehtinen).

I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz).

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to my friend from Georgia, Dr. Broun.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, I would have opposed amendments like Dr. Broun's on the floor, but I think that everyone should have an opportunity to be heard, even with ideas that I think are premature, because I don't know how the people of Puerto Rico are going to vote. So it's premature to say at this stage, okay, you have to speak this language or the other language because you're going to vote this way or the other way. No. No. All this does is start a process that will allow the people of Puerto Rico to speak. And it's the first time that there has been a federally authorized referendum for the people of Puerto Rico, and I think it's fair.

At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to my friend, the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).

Mr. Speaker, I support the historic underlying legislation being brought to the floor today. Again, I commend Mr. Pierluisi and Governor Fortuno.

In order to rightly return, however, to the open rule precedent set by the Republicans in 1998, I will be asking for a ``no'' vote on the previous question so that we can amend this rule and allow the House to consider the Puerto Rico Democracy Act under an open rule.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Ladies in White are a group of wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters of Cuban political prisoners. The group came together after the arrests of 75 Cuban dissidents in April 2003. Seventy-five Cuban political prisoners who, 7 years ago, joined the thousands of others who are imprisoned in Cuba because of their political beliefs or for ``crimes'' that are only ``crimes'' in a country brutally oppressed by a totalitarian regime of gangsters, by gangsters, and for gangsters. Because that is what the Castro brothers are--gangsters.

Fidel Castro has been a gangster since he was a juvenile delinquent. He became a Communist to give ideological clothing to his gangsterism. Raul Castro came to gangsterism via Marxism-Leninism, after his brother sent him as an almost illiterate adolescent to then-Czechoslovakia, where he received a rigorous indoctrination in Marxism-Leninism. So the brothers arrived at gangsterism via separate paths, but they are both experienced and ruthless practitioners of the most violent and brutal forms of gangsterism.

The Ladies in White experience the tactics of the Castros' gangsterism every single day. The Castros' state security apparatus pays and trains thugs to strike fear in the hearts of all Cubans in order to keep the regime in power. The thugs, the plainclothes terrorists of the Castros' regime, harass, intimidate, insult, spit upon, and engage in violence against the unarmed dissidents and other independent civil society members in Cuba. These spectacles are known as ``acts of repudiation.'' The international press refers to the plainclothes thugs of the Castros' state security apparatus as ``civilian government supporters,'' but that doesn't change their true nature. No, they're not ``plainclothes government supporters.'' They're plainclothes thugs of Cuban state security.

On recent Sundays, the Ladies in White have gone to church, as every Sunday, to pray for their family members who are political prisoners, and the thugs have become more violent. Protected by uniformed state security agents, the plainclothes thugs have spat upon and committed acts of violence against Laura Pollan, Bertha Soler, Reina Tamayo, Julia Esther Nunez, Asuncion Carrillo, Loida Valdez, Laura Maria Labrada, and the other Ladies in White.

I hereby submit for the Record the names of 96 Ladies in White who have been actively demanding the release of Cuban political prisoners in recent months.

1. Martha Diaz Rondon

2. Regla Vaillant Planas

3. Mildre Noemi Sanchez Infante

4. Ercilia Correoso Perez

5. Maritza Castro Martinez

6. Blanca Hernandez Moya

7. Lilia Castaner Hernandez

8. Ivonne Malleza Galano

9. Deysi Lazara Suarez Martinez

10. Odalys Sanabria Rodriguez

11. Caridad Caballero Batista

12. Zoila Hernandez Diaz

13. Gertrudis Ojeda Suarez

14. Niurkis Rivero Despaigne

15. Mercedes Fresneda Castillo

16. Sara Martha Fonseca Acevedo

17. Ismari Salomon Carcases

18. Tania Montoya Vazquez

19. Yolanda Martinez Guerra

20. Guadalupe Varela Mora

21. Zayli Figueroa Acosta

22. Odalys Zurman Gonzalez

23. Barbara Couyedo Riego

24. Miriam Espinosa del Valle

25. Doraida Perez Paceiro

26. Iris Tamara Perez Aguilera

27. Mayra Morejon Hernandez

28. Mari Blanca Avila Esposito

29. Petra Serafina Diaz Castillo

30. Rosario Morales La Rosa

31. Sonia Garro Alfonso

32. Maylisis Abrahantes Munoz

33. Juana Gomez Riego

34. Yudermis Fonseca Rondon

35. Crispina Xiomara Duquesne Suarez

36. Doralis Alvares Soto

37. Ana Iris Vega Rodriguez

38. Lazara M. Caballero Betancourt

39. Marlenis Guerra Martin

40. Nerys Castillo Moreno

41. Tania Maceda Guerra

42. Caridad Sarduy Fernandez

43. Raquel Castillo Urquiza

44. Sandra Guerra Perez

45. Maria Elena Fernandez

46. Yaneris Perez Rey

47. Roxaida Ramirez Matos

48. Dulce Avalo Diaz

50. Ariela Riviaux Castillo

51. Evelia Hernandez Ravelo

52. Georgina Noa Monte

53. Belinda Barzaga Lugo

54. Marioris Moreno Noa

55. Xiomara Duquesne Suarez

56. Mirtha Gomez Colas

57. Madeline Lazara Betancourt

58. Yaquelin Cutino

59. Gladis Lugo Exposito

60. Dulce Maria Quintana

61. Suyoanis Tapia Mayeta

62. Leonor Reynord Borges

63. Leydi Coca Quesada

64. Noely Camila Araujo Molina

65. Yordanka Pena Lopez

66. Yeni Palenzuela Izquierdo

67. Ana Aguililla

68. Laura Ines Pollan Toledo

69. Bertha Soler Fernandez

70. Melba Santana Ariz

71. Reyna Luisa Tamayo Danger

72. Belkis Cantillo Ramirez

73. Alejandrina Garcia de la Rivas

74. Julia Nunez Pacheco

75. Nelida Borrego Aragon

76. Reyna Maria Ortiz Tamayo

77. Milka Maria Pena Martinez

78. Ana Belkis Ferrer Garcia

79. Loida Valdes Gonzalez

80. Lidia Esther Lima Valdes

81. Magaly Broche de la Cruz

82. Isabel Sanchez Altarriba

83. Yamile Velazquez Batista

84. Sonia Alvarez Campillo

85. Asuncion Carrillo Hernandez

86. Irene Viera Filloy

87. Barbara Rojo Arias

88. Iraida Soledad Rivas Verdecia

89. Amada Evelia Hernandez Ravel

90. Catalina Cano

91. Elsa Gonzalez Padron

92. Belkis Barzaga Lugo

93. Gisela Delgado Sablon

94. Noelia Pedraza Jimenez

95. Nancy Sanchez Altarriba

96. Mercedes Acosta antiago de Cuba

I also submit for the Record a letter sent today by representatives of the Ladies in White outside of Cuba, Blanca Reyes Castanon and Yolanda Huerga, asking international leaders for support in the Ladies in White's struggle for human rights and liberty.

March 27, 2010.

Dear Sir, We write you as the Representatives of the Ladies

in White in Europe and the United States, to seek your urgent

attention for the current plight of Cuba's political

prisoners and their families.

The Ladies in White are members of independent civil

society and the group was born spontaneously, seven years

ago, as a result of the arrest of 75 members of the peaceful

opposition by the Cuban regime during the Black Spring of

2003. Wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters of these

prisoners only ask for the right to see their unjustly jailed

relatives freed.

By this means we seek to ask, that as a representative of a

democratic nation where human rights and freedom of speech

are respected, that you attempt, and within your ability,

interest yourself personally and seek the attention of those

individuals and institutions that you see fit, to defend

these

women, and their relatives, so that all hostility that they

suffer in the streets of Havana and in all of Cuba cease,

both physically and verbally, for defending their right to

freedom.

We thank you for your time and cooperation, and we trust in

your invaluable help, at the same time that we insist that

the current situation is extremely delicate and dangerous.

Respectfully,

Blanca Reyes Castanon,

Representatives in Europe.

Yolanda Huerga,

Representative in the United States.

This last Sunday, the day before yesterday, the Ladies in White were surrounded and subjected to 7 hours of insults and acts of violence by the plainclothes thugs of the Castros' state security apparatus. Surrounded and subjected to nightmarish, abominable insults and grotesque sexual gestures, as well as loud, constant screams and chants of communist slogans and violence for 7 hours, the day before yesterday, subjected to the well-planned tactics which are part of the training of the plainclothes state security agents of the Castros' gangster regime.

But the Ladies in White continue to stand tall. Like the political prisoners who they defend, the Ladies in White represent the true Cuba. They embody the decency, patriotism, and love of the real Cuba--not the grotesque, perverted hatred, envy, and perfidy of the Castros and their gangster regime.

This evening, my thoughts and prayers of limitless admiration and solidarity are with Cuba's Damas de Blanco--the Ladies in White.

Madam Speaker, I rise to honor Comcast Cares Day, an annual day of service that is one of the largest single-day volunteer efforts in the country. Comcast is an active and engaged member of the Miami-Dade community and supports its well-being through annual volunteer activities.

This year's event will be the ninth annual company-wide day of service. Since 2001, Comcast employees have given more than 500,000 hours of service to more than 725 non-profit community partners across the country. In recognition of the efforts of their employees, The Comcast Foundation has also contributed $8 million to its community partners in support of their year-round work in our communities.

Comcast Miami has announced the Edgar J. Hall Special Populations Center as the recipient of Comcast Cares Day 2010. Edgar J. Hall Special Population Center is part of the City of Hialeah's Recreation and Community Services Department, which provides recreational programs for adults with disabilities, particularly the developmentally disabled. It is home to the largest Special Olympics delegation in Miami-Dade County.

On April 24th more than 600 employees and their families will start Comcast Cares Day at Bucky Dent Park in the City of Hialeah. Projects include the planting of a food garden, a grounds and building make- over, and new upgrades which will increase accessibility for the disabled.

I wish to recognize Comcast and their employees for their dedication to serving the community, and I congratulate the Edgar J. Hall Special Population Center and the City of Hialeah for being this year's beneficiary of Comcast Cares Day.

Mr. Speaker, I truly hope this massive bill is not passed by the House today. If it does become law, it will constitute a decisive step in the weakening of the United States. At precisely the time when we should be implementing necessary reforms to strengthen and save Medicare, for example, this legislation raids Medicare by more than $500 billion in order to pay for a new, massive entitlement.

At a time when it would still be possible to enact entitlement reforms to prevent a Greece-style fiscal catastrophe in the future, when genuinely

painful economic medicine will be needed, we are creating a massive new entitlement.

We could have avoided the social convulsion and profound pain that prolonged fiscal irresponsibility inevitably brings to nations, but this President and this Congressional majority went with dogma instead.

And when the time comes for the United States to have to face economic reality, and painful traumatic reforms are implemented by a future President and a future Congress, the U.S. military posture, our standard of living, the American middle class as we know it, those interconnected realities which have been so wonderful in characterizing modern America and which this President and this Congressional majority apparently seem to take for granted, those realities will be but historical memories.

This legislation is dishonest. It is irresponsible. It should be defeated.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my good friend, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), for the time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I would like to take a minute to contrast what the majority is doing today with what it is expected to do this weekend.

Today, the majority has brought forth a rule to provide 1 hour of debate for consideration of H.R. 3644, the Ocean, Coastal, and Watershed Education Act, and another hour of debate for H.R. 1612, the Public Lands Service Corps Act of 2009. That is a total of 2 hours of debate on bills that would direct the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to establish education and watershed programs to advance environmental literacy, and expand the authorization to provide service-learning opportunities on public lands and train public land managers. I thank my good friend for thoroughly detailing and covering what is in those bills.

If the majority proceeds as expected later this weekend, Madam Speaker, the House will prohibit, other than in the rule, all time to debate the Senate health care bill and will send it to the President for his signature. So that bill, the Senate health care bill, would become law even though the House of Representatives would never consider it, never debate the bill. The House, in fact, has never even held a committee meeting on the Senate health care bill.

On Sunday, it is expected that the majority will deem the bill passed, and in a few days it would be law, the signature issue of this President and this congressional majority.

You would think, Madam Speaker, that they would proudly embrace their signature accomplishment. You would think that they would welcome debate on it. But they do not, because they know that the Senate bill is fatally flawed. The American people deserve a full and complete debate in the House on the Senate health care bill, but they won't get it.

Again, let's juxtapose that reality with today's actions.

Today, 2 hours of debate on two noncontroversial bills that cost $300 million and absolutely no debate, no committee hearings on a bill that costs nearly $1 trillion, covers one-sixth of our economy, and will affect every single American. That is unfair and inappropriate.

Last year, the majority rushed through a 300-page amendment at 3 in the morning that no one was able to read on cap-and-trade. At that time, the American people rightly stood up and demanded that Congress read the bill. After this weekend's action, the people will demand that Congress not only read bills, but that we debate and vote on bills.

It would seem like common sense, Madam Speaker. But with this majority, it often seems as though common sense is the least common of the senses.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for supporting 2 or 3 hours of debate on one-sixth of our economy.

I would point out that, pursuant to House rules, the deeming, which is presumed will occur with regard to the Senate bill in the debate on the rule itself, that debate is limited to 1 hour. So I would assume the 2 or 3 hours total would be after that bill, the Senate bill, is deemed to have passed by the 1 hour of debate on the rule.

But suffice it to say, it is an improvement that, with regard to one- sixth of the economy, our friends are saying that we should have 2 or 3 hours. But we will continue pressing.

Anyway, I would ask my friend if he has any further speakers. I have none.

Madam Speaker, having said that, since there are no more Members on this side of the aisle who have requested time, I yield back the balance of my time.

Would my friend yield?

Actually, I was going to inquire, because I yielded my time back as my friend knows because we had no further speakers, but Mr. Lungren has arrived and would like to address the House.

I would ask unanimous consent to reclaim our time, Madam Speaker.

I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Lungren).

I thank my friend again for his courtesy, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, inside the

gulag of prisons in the Caribbean totalitarian state of the Castro brothers, a few days ago six heroes managed to get a statement out of one of the prisons, and I'd like to read it at this time.

``We continue to suffer cruel treatment, inhuman, degrading treatment, and even torture in the Communist regime's prisons. We ask all who support Cuba's freedom to, between March 12 and March 31, unite in short periods of fasting and study of the Bible, demanding the liberation of all political prisoners and liberty and democracy in Cuba. Please engage in short fasts and prayer sessions in your homes, churches, or other public gathering places, and speak out in articles and conferences to reflect upon and help implement, through peaceful, just, and patriotic means, the long-sought objectives of the Cuban people.''

And this statement is from Oscar Elias Biscet, Julio Cesar Galvez, Ricardo Gonzalez, Normando Hernandez, Regis Iglesias, and Angel Moya. They are in the Combinado del Este prison of Cuba. This was sent March 3rd.

The Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies was formed this last Friday, Madam Speaker, under the leadership of Lithuania, that is chairing the Community of Democracies, and especially a magnificent diplomat, Ambassador Pavilionis.

Lithuania led the Community of Democracies to form a parliamentary assembly, the Parliamentary Forum, and the first meeting was held in Vilnius, Lithuania, on Friday. And the first resolution by motion of the new president of the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies, President Zingeris, the first resolution of that Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies, I'd like to read. It's titled Calling for Support of Cuba's Pro-Democracy Movement. In the convening meeting, the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies, Vilnius, Lithuania, March 12, 2010:

``Whereas the pro-democracy movement in Cuba has grown at a rapid pace over the last 3 years, and specifically expressions of the movement are evident today in the explosion of bloggers, independent journalists and musicians, artists, writers, and others who are using their talents to denounce the atrocities of the dictatorship, all while putting forth new ideas for the transition to democracy;

``Whereas there are still extraordinary obstacles to overcome such as the continued repression by the totalitarian dictatorship, extremely limited access to the Internet and 'texting' capabilities, and a lack of a coherent message of solidarity from the international community;

``Whereas the dictatorship is fearful of the growth of the pro- democracy movement;

``Whereas the message of the movement is coherent and clear in demanding freedom for all Cuban political prisoners, beginning with those are gravely ill inside the prisons, freedom of expression, and fair multiparty elections with international supervision;

``Whereas this common position of the Cuban pro-democracy movement requires recognition, dissemination, and solidarity on the part of the international community;

``Whereas now more than ever the Cuban pro-democracy movement requires that the democratic community take concrete steps to demonstrate its solidarity;

``Now, therefore it is resolved by the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies that it condemns the brutality of the Cuban regime against Cuban political prisoners;

expresses its full support for the Cuban pro-democracy movement;

honors Cuban pro-democracy fighters such as the martyr Orlando Zapata Tamayo and express its admiration for the efforts of other heroes such as Guillermo Farinas;

calls for the immediate release of all Cuban political prisoners and free multiparty elections in Cuba; and

calls on the democratic community to take concrete steps in demonstrating their solidarity with the Cuban pro-democracy movement by providing humanitarian and technological assistance to the pro- democracy movement, urging foreign diplomatic posts in Havana to strengthen contacts with pro-democracy activists on the island, encouraging foreign dignitaries to visit Cuba for the sole purpose of meeting with pro-democracy activists, and looking for opportunities to reiterate and support the common position of the Cuban pro-democracy movement in the international community.''

This action by the Parliamentary Forum of the Community of Democracies deserves commendation. Those heroes in the gulag who are suffering today are the leaders of Cuba tomorrow, and they deserve our support.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Richard (Dick) Rechtien and his business, Rechtien International Trucks, which received the prestigious honor of the International Circle of Excellence Award for 2009.

The Circle of Excellence Award is awarded by the international dealer organization of Navistar, Inc., and honors international truck dealerships that achieve the highest level of dealer performance with respect to operating and financial standards, market representation, and most importantly, customer satisfaction. It is the highest honor a dealer principal can receive from the company.

Rechtien International Trucks was founded in 1981 and is headquartered in Miami. Under his leadership, it has grown into one of the preeminent truck dealerships in the Southeast and the entire nation, with 188 employees and four dealer locations, including Miami, Riviera Beach, Fort Pierce and Broward County. Dick has served as chairman of the International Dealer Council and of the Florida Trucking Association, and as co-chair of numerous dealer advisory groups for Navistar. With this most recent award, Rechtien International will now receive the Circle of Excellence Award, under Dick's leadership, a total of 23 times.

Through his commitment to hard work and outstanding customer service, he has built an economically vital business of which he can be justly proud. Madam Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join with me in congratulating Dick Rechtien for his record of accomplishment and for his many contributions to our South Florida community.

I thank my dear friend Mr. Roskam for the time, and I simply rise to join my voice in praise and commendation for all those who have made possible that this resolution come to the floor. I think it speaks very highly of this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, there is no more generous nation in the world than the American Nation, the American people. One sees that generosity time and time again. As Mr. Blumenauer mentioned, we just saw an extraordinary outpouring of generosity toward the people of Haiti, and then we have seen another tragedy, and the American people, with regard to Chile, are demonstrating once again that extraordinary generosity.

So I think it is so appropriate, and that is why I rise to commend all of those that have made this resolution possible, to accelerate the deduction for the donations that Americans have made, extend that policy with regard to Haiti and to make it possible with regard to the donations that are being made or have been made or will be made for those who have suffered in Chile. Our hearts and our prayers go out to those who suffer in both of those neighbor, friendly nations. They are wonderful people, great friends of the United States.

Remembering the victims, I think the Congress, by this action today, not only takes a step that is consistent with the generosity of the American people, but I think makes a very commendable act. So I simply wanted to join my voice of commendation for all of those who have made this possible.

I'd like to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, on Sunday the Iraqi people went to the polls to vote in their latest national parliamentary elections. Millions of Iraqis voted at thousands of voting stations throughout the country. The democratic process is succeeding in Iraq. The people there, despite extraordinarily difficult challenges, are able to express themselves in free elections.

Sunday was a good day for the future of Iraq. Those elections would not have taken place but for the decision of President Bush in 2007 to send over 20,000 surge troops to Iraq in order to establish, ``a unified democratic federal Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself, and sustain itself.'' Those elections would not have been possible but for the sacrifices of our troops and their families. Just 4 months ago, Mr. Speaker, President Obama announced a surge strategy for Afghanistan. He committed 30,000 additional forces to a counterinsurgency strategy that I believe will help to strengthen the government in Afghanistan's security forces, as the surge did in Iraq.

Since President Obama's announcement, we've seen considerable results. For example, last month, our troops began what is known as the Marjah offensive. The joint offensive with the Afghan National Army and coalition partners has pushed the Taliban out of Marjah and has allowed the Afghan government to take control of significant areas that were previously controlled by the Taliban. This offensive is what General David Petraeus, the commander of the United States Central Command, has described as the ``initial salvo'' in a 12- to 18-month campaign to defeat the Taliban.

Now I have had and I continue to have, Mr. Speaker, disagreements with policies of President Obama, but I have said privately, I have said publicly, and I reiterate here today, that in the case of Afghanistan, President Obama has demonstrated great responsibility and a sense of the national security interest of the United States. He deserves our support.

Just as our military is making tangible progress, like the Marjah offensive demonstrates, just as this is occurring, many of our colleagues in the majority party now feel that it is time to withdraw from Afghanistan. The resolution that we are set to debate today would require the President to withdraw our troops in 30 days. I believe that that would be precipitous. I believe that precipitously withdrawing our troops would be reckless. I believe it would allow the Taliban to regain control of Afghanistan and thereby provide criminal groups such as al Qaeda with carte blanche to run terrorist training camps and plan terrorist attacks against the United States and our allies. I would remind my colleagues that it was the safe harbor and support that the Taliban gave bin Laden which allowed him to plan the September 11, 2001, attacks from Afghanistan against this country. A reconstituted Taliban will undoubtedly do the same and will pose a significant and grave risk to the national security of the United States.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, that we must never allow Afghanistan to once again fall into the hands of terrorists whose sole purpose is to destroy the United States and to kill innocent civilians. Precipitous withdrawal would not only be dangerous, I believe, to our national security, but would constitute a mortal blow to the Afghan people, who are relying on our support.

Although they have far to go, Afghanistan has made demonstrable progress. But if this resolution were to become U.S. policy, all the improvements made by the Afghan people would disappear. Afghans would no longer be given the chance to vote in elections. The Taliban would rule by the edict of terror. It would mean the return of a nightmarish tyranny to Afghanistan. Women would see the rights they have gained disappear as the Taliban once again made women noncitizens and banned young girls, who for the first time are learning to read, from schools.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that now is not the time to turn our backs on the Afghan people. It is not the time to counter the mission of our troops, especially when they are engaged in the first major offensive of President Obama's reaffirmed counterinsurgency strategy. Let us send a message to the terrorists that the United States is committed to our mission to prevent the return to power of the Taliban. Let us soundly defeat this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I think this has been a good discussion today. And I think it is appropriate to have it. I certainly hope that the result is clear, and that this Congress today strongly and in a bipartisan way rejects the resolution that is being brought forth. It would be a grave mistake for us to allow the Taliban to regain power in Afghanistan.

Sometimes the lessons of history may be a little bit more difficult to explain. In this case, when the Taliban was in power they opened the country up to training camps for terrorists to attack the United States. That was in 2001. It is not ancient history. So I hope we don't forget the lessons of history.

In addition, as I said before, Mr. Speaker, our Armed Forces with our coalition allies and the Afghan armed forces are in the midst of the first major offensive in President Obama's new strategy. So I think it would be a grave mistake if this Congress does not clearly and emphatically reject the resolution today.

Having said that, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, The United States and Australia share a longstanding relationship that has allowed the two nations to cooperate on many international issues. Due to the strength and depth of this relationship, the United States has relied on the support of our ally Australia in many of our mutual international objectives. This relationship continues to be strengthened through the cooperation of our two governments and through the cultural exchanges that occur between our nations.

Developed by Erik Federing in 1999, the Uni-Capitol Internship Program enables a select group of young Australian students to experience the work of the United States Congress. It is through Mr. Federing's tireless efforts that this year, twelve exceptional Australian students are participating in internships in different Congressional offices. I have had the opportunity to work with three Australian students during the past five years and their professionalism and work ethic has been extraordinary.

This year my office worked with another student from the Uni-Capitol Internship Program,

Matthew Robertson. Matthew is a third year law student at Deakin University in Melbourne Australia. He applied to the program with the hope to learn more about the American government. Matthew's extensive knowledge of the Australian government and legal system enhances his understanding of the American legislative process. During his time at my office he had the opportunity to attend Committee hearings, briefings, perform legislative research, and prepare memos for my staff and myself. His professionalism in the office and willingness to handle any task that was assigned to him were outstanding. It has truly been a pleasure to have Matthew in the office.

I am certain that my colleagues were similarly impressed with the work done by the eleven other Australian students in the program. I rise to commend the Uni-Capitol Internship Program for its work to strengthen the relationship between the United States and Australia; and offer Matthew my thanks for a job well done.

I rise today to inform my colleagues that a great Cuban hero, Orlando Zapata Tamayo, who is a prisoner of conscience in the gulag of the Castro brothers, is in critical condition and near death.

Forty-two years old, Orlando Zapata has been active in the Cuban pro- democracy movement for many years. Already a political prisoner in 2003, he was released by Castro for 14 days before being imprisoned once again and sentenced to 25 years in the gulag, in March 2003.

A colleague and partner in the struggle for freedom of Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, Orlando Zapata personifies the best of mankind. And the fact that he is near death at this moment in the Castros' gulag points to the profoundly criminal nature of that grotesque totalitarian criminal regime. His condition and fate are the Castro brothers' doing. If he dies, his blood will be on Castro's hands.

I would like to thank my friend, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) for the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Last week, the Department of Labor, Madam Speaker, reported that Americans filed 473,000 jobless claims in the week ending February 13. That is an increase of 31,000 more claims than the previous week. It is truly unfortunate that the number of jobless claims continues to rise 1 year after the passage of the massive so-called ``stimulus bill.'' Take, for example, the district that I am honored to represent. According to Recovery.gov, the administration's stimulus Web site, the stimulus bill spent $185 million to create 310 jobs. That was at a cost of $600,000 per job.

Now, Madam Speaker, what worries me even more than the $1 trillion so-called ``stimulus bill'' is the fact that it continues the process of adding to our national debt at a time when we can least afford it. It is expected that the deficit, in large part due to the waste of money in the stimulus bill, is set to hit a record $1.6 trillion. The U.S. economy is dangerously close to the catastrophic precipice of uncontrollable debt. We must urgently alter Washington's fiscal course before the American middle class, as we know it, is relegated to the history books.

Why do I mention the stimulus and the state of our economy? To point out that, while our economy continues to stumble and to stutter and as jobless claims rise, the majority has decided to pass legislation that would recognize Native Hawaiians as a sovereign governing entity. Now, just 2 months ago, the distinguished Speaker declared that her party should be judged on the issue of ``jobs, jobs, jobs.''

How does the bill before us today have anything to do with job creation?

I understand that this is the last week in Congress for my good friend, one of the most respected Members of this House, Representative Abercrombie. I know I join all Members of the House in thanking him for his great work as a Member of this House and also for his friendship. As I say, I have great respect for him.

Last night, he testified before the Rules Committee about his work on the underlying legislation. He told us that he first began working on this issue when he was in the Hawaii legislature in 1974. It was very clear from his testimony that this is a very important issue for him, and I congratulate him for his hard work.

Yet there is an undeniable issue here that I have made reference to that was pointed out in terms of its importance to the American people by a recent opinion research poll which found that 84 percent of Americans think that Congress has not done enough for the creation of jobs. I think what the majority is doing today will simply reinforce that belief by the American people.

Madam Speaker, I thank the majority for their uncharacteristic generosity in allowing the House to debate both of the Republican amendments submitted to the Rules Committee for consideration. Unfortunately, over a year into this Congress, the purportedly most open and bipartisan Congress in history, the majority has yet to allow even one open rule. That's quite unfortunate, but yet it is business as usual for the majority to continue to claim bipartisanship while working to block full and open debate.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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