Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, every once in a while, a vote comes before us that is evidently more than important, and this is one such vote. This is an historic vote that we are taking today on a special relationship with the countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic. Those countries, their Presidents, their Parliaments, have taken a definitive step; they have resisted the totalitarian temptations, the destabilization efforts of the axis of Ortega and Chavez with his hundreds of millions of dollars that he is pouring into these countries and the entire region to destabilize them. They have resisted that access, and they have voted for a special relationship with the United States.

Talk about pressure, I say to my colleagues. Mr. Speaker, the pressures that are genuine, that are extraordinary, are the ones that are felt by those countries, the countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic, to accept, to go forth with a totalitarian temptation, and they have rejected that.

They have provided troops to help us in the war against terrorism in Iraq. What would we be saying, Mr. Speaker, if we voted against CAFTA today? ``Thank you. Thank you for your help in Iraq. Thank you for progressing with democratic reforms, for establishing democracy. Thank you, but no thanks. We do not want you to tie your histories, your destinies, your futures to the United States, which is what you have decided to do.''

We have an obligation, Mr. Speaker, to say, yes, we are proud of our special relationship with our brother countries of this hemisphere. We recognize that you are our allies, you are our friends. You have stood with us in peace, you have stood with us in war, you have decided to tie your futures to us, and we say, welcome.

That is what this vote is all about, Mr. Speaker. It is a critically important historic vote. Say ``yes'' to the rule and say ``yes'' to this agreement. Say ``yes'' to CAFTA.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Guido Sigler Amaya, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Sigler Amaya is a member of the Alternative Option Movement, and an activist of the pro-democracy opposition in Cuba. According to Amnesty International, he has been detained and harassed several times in the past. He was incarcerated in the totalitarian gulag in December 1999, after participating in a peaceful demonstration to celebrate the 51st anniversary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In 2002, he was again detained when he attempted to meet at a home in Havana to discuss human rights.

Despite the constant threats, despite being previously incarcerated in the gulag, Mr. Sigler Amaya never gave up his dignified struggle for democracy and basic human rights. Unfortunately, as part of the dictator's condemnable, March 2003, crackdown, Mr. Sigler Amaya was arrested. After a sham trial, he was sentenced to 20 years in the totalitarian gulag.

Let me be very clear, Mr. Sigler Amaya is languishing in the depraved conditions of the totalitarian gulag because of his peaceful actions to promote basic human rights: The U.S. State Department describes the conditions in the gulag as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' It is a crime of the highest order that brave men and women are imprisoned in these nightmarish conditions simply for their belief in freedom.

Tragically, Mr. Guido Sigler Amaya is not the only member of his family sentenced to the totalitarian gulag. His brothers, Ariel and Miguel Sigler Amaya, whom I will speak about in the coming weeks, have been sentenced to 20 years and over 2 years in the gulag, respectively. These three brothers are brilliant and admirable examples of the heroism of the Cuban people. No matter how intense the repression, no matter how severe the consequences of a dignified struggle for liberty, the totalitarian gulags are full of men and women who represent the very best of the Cuban nation.

Mr. Speaker, it is completely unacceptable that, while the world stands by in silence and acquiescence, these three brothers are systematically tortured because of their belief in freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Guido Sigler Amaya, Ariel Sigler Amaya, Miguel Sigler Amaya and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recall the tragic anniversary of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus.

On July 20, 1974, the nation of Cyprus was viscously attacked by Turkey. This abominable act of violence against the people of Cyprus has never been undone. To this day, Turkish troops illegally occupy Cyprus, splitting the nation into two areas.

Since 1974, the nation has been divided, but progress is being made toward the reunification of Cyprus. In late April 2004, the people of Cyprus went to the polls to vote on a plan of reunification. Unfortunately, this reunification proposal was rushed, allegedly to coincide with the ascension of Cyprus into the European Union. Because of many legitimate concerns, including security, and in a demonstration of great courage and independence, approximately 75 percent of Greek Cypriots opposed the plan. However, this rushed and unfortunate effort must not, and will not, be the end of attempts to reunify the island. A lasting and equitable solution for the people of Cyprus, and the goal of a united Cyprus, is too important to abandon, now or ever.

The goal of the process must be to attain a just and lasting solution, not a rushed or imposed solution. Currently, the Republic of Cyprus is seeking a plan that truly reunifies both its society and economy, while allowing each community to retain its own identity and culture, without foreign occupation.

I remain committed to achieving a solution to this problem so that we never have to gather again to commemorate an anniversary of this condemnable and unjustifiable invasion. Mr. Speaker, I pray that this will be the last year of a divided Cyprus. It is my fervent hope that, 31 years after Cyprus was torn asunder, all Cypriots can be reunited, living in peace and freedom forever.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Alejandro Gonzalez Raga, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Gonzalez Raga is an independent journalist and a contributor to the Camaguey Press Agency. As an independent journalist in a totalitarian Cuba, Mr. Gonzalez Raga's truthful articles have helped the world to learn the facts about the nightmare that is the Castro regime. Because of his belief in factual reporting, Mr. Gonzalez Raga relentlessly chronicled the atrocities committed by Castro's machinery of repression. I remind my colleagues that, under Castro's totalitarian regime, any freedom of the press, any effort to display the atrocities of the regime under the spotlight of truth, is met with swift and violent repression.

In March, 2003, Mr. Gonzalez Raga was arrested as part of the dictatorship's heinous crackdown on peaceful pro-democracy activists. According to Reporters Without Borders, as part of his sham trial, Mr. Gonzalez Raga was accused of ``cooperating with the foreign press,'' and of ``systematically endangering territorial integrity'' by writing reports on subjects considered ``very sensitive'' by the dictatorship such as ``shortages due to the economic crisis, relations with other countries, TV programs, the education budget.'' He was sentenced to 14 years in Castro's dungeons for these ``crimes.''

Let me be very clear, Mr. Gonzalez Raga is currently languishing in the depraved conditions of the totalitarian gulag for his truthful articles. The U.S. State Department describes the conditions in the gulag as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' The State Department also reports that police and prison officials beat, neglect, isolate, and deny medical treatment to detainees and prisoners. It is a crime of the highest order that people are imprisoned in these nightmarish conditions simply for reporting the facts.

Mr. Speaker, it is as inconceivable as it is unacceptable that, while the world stands by in silence and acquiescence, independent journalists who write the truth about totalitarian regimes are systematically tortured. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Alejandro Gonzalez Raga and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Hector Raul Valle Hernandez, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Valle Hernandez is a pro-democracy leader, the vice president of the Confederation of Democratic Workers of Cuba and an activist in the Pro Human Rights Party. According to Amnesty International, on November 16, 2002, he was interrogated by Castor's thugs and told to stop his activities against the totalitarian regime. Despite the constant harassment, violence, and repression directed at him by the tyrant, Mr. Valle Hernandez continued to advocate for human rights and democracy.

In March 2003, as part of Castro's condemnable crackdown on peaceful pro-democracy activists, he was arrested. In a sham trial, he was sentenced to 12 years in the totalitarian gulag.

Mr. Valle Hernandez is currently languishing in the abhorrent gulag because of his belief in liberty for the Cuban people. According to Amnesty International, Mr. Valle Hernandez' family has been harassed and his wife has been ``summoned'' for taking part in opposition activities. Let me be very clear, Mr. Valle Hernandez is locked in a totalitarian dungeon that the U.S. State Department describes as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' His wife and family are harassed and threatened, yet Mr. Valle Hernandez and his family have not stopped demanding human rights, labor rights, and freedom for the people of Cuba.

Mr. Valle Hernandez is a wonderful example of the heroism of the Cuban people. No matter how intense the repression, no matter how horrifically brutal the consequences of a dignified struggle for liberty, no matter how often their families are harassed and threatened, the totalitarian gulags are full of men and women

of all backgrounds and ages who represent the best of the Cuban nation.

Mr. Speaker, it is as inconceivable as it is unacceptable that, while the world stands by in silence and acquiescence, political prisoners are systematically tortured because of their belief in freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Hector Raul Valle Hernandez and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that section 945 of H.R. 3058 is in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI.

That rule precludes changes in existing law from being report in a general appropriation bill. The section directly amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act, an Act within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Financial Services regarding the use of credit reports.

The section beginning on page 222, line 23, through 223, line 20, clearly constitutes legislation on an appropriations bill.

I would note further that House Resolution 342, the rule providing for consideration of the bill, did not waive points of order under clause 2 rule XXI against this section.

I would urge the Chair to sustain the point of order.

Mr. Chairman, this issue has been debated at length by the House. There was a similar amendment that was debated at length. It was rejected by the membership of this House by a significant vote. In this case today on an appropriations bill, legislating this issue, that has been debated and rejected in an appropriate forum, this is not clearly an appropriate forum. I reiterate my point of order.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendment.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman.

Is debate supposed to be on the point of order?

Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment at hand requires a new determination. And so I make the point of order against this amendment.

We will have discussion today, Mr. Chairman, on the right of all the people of Cuba to be free and the right for them not to have families divided. They pray every day for freedom, and they work for it. We will have that debate. But not on amendments that violate the rules of this House.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).

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

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

Mr. Chairman, some may ask why the Cuban American community overwhelmingly not only supports these measures to limit resources to the terrorist regime, but elects Members, each and every Member, Cuban American Member whether they are Republicans or Democrats, who also agree with the overwhelming majority of the Cuban American community on measures to limit resources to the terrorist regime.

Among the reasons for that, obviously, it is because it is a terrorist regime, an anti-American terrorist regime, that oppresses the Cuban people and has done so for 46 years; but also because Cuban Americans know that freedom never comes free. The only country in the world that has the benefit of a law here in the United States that says one reaches soil in the United States and they are treated like a political asylee are Cubans. And with those great privileges, the great privilege of the Cuban Adjustment Act, come responsibilities.

If one is from any other country in the world, as the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) said, and they are a political asylee, they cannot go back once every 3 years. They cannot go back, period, until the political situation changes in the country they have left. But Cubans not only are treated, and rightfully so, because they are fleeing a Communist tyranny in this hemisphere, as though they were jumping over the Berlin Wall, they are treated as political asylees, but they can go back and visit family every 3 years; whereas from any other country in the world, political asylees cannot.

So, at this point, I would say this is a very serious issue, but suffice it to say that it is not by chance that all the Cuban American Members of this House and the overwhelming majority of the community support all of these measures to limit resources from the terrorist regime.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the distinguished leader and Member from the International Relations Committee.

Mr. Chairman, the reason that President Bush implemented these regs, the reason we have an embargo is because we want the political prisoners freed, because we want political parties legalized, labor unions legalized, the press legalized, and elections scheduled, and we want to retain the leverage of those billions of dollars in travel until the dictatorship releases political prisoners. And you know something, yes, there is pain involved in the Cuban tragedy. But the pain comes from the tragedy of the dictatorship and not because of our policies.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Did the gentleman not hear when I spoke 10 seconds ago?

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on Mr. Flake's amendments. He has got, I believe, eight of them, and I am not sure if all of them are consistent with the rules of the House. So what I would like to do because I do know that some at least or at least another one is not, I reserve a point of order on Mr. Flake's amendments.

Mr. Chairman, again, I was not aware of which of the multiple amendments that the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) has filed he was going to bring up at this time. My understanding is that this particular amendment, of the many that he has filed, is in order. So I look forward to the debate.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the reservation of the point of order.

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

My understanding of this, of the many amendments that Mr. Flake has filed with regard to matters that would increase currency to the regime, this amendment states that he wants to tie the President's hands from issuing any further regulations that could have the effect of changing the current regulation that does permit religious travel to Cuba. So I want it to be clear, there is currently a category in U.S. law that permits travel for religious purposes to Cuba.

What the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) is saying is, well, I do not know if in the future the President could do something that I disagree with, and so I want to prohibit something the President may do in the future with this amendment. For example, the regime, colleagues, I am sure are aware of the fact, has had about 15 spies arrested in the United States in the last 3 or 4 years. If the administration should find that the religious travel category were being utilized to either train spies or intensify the efforts of Cuban state security against the United States, this amendment would prohibit the President from issuing, in effect, further regulations on that.

Religious travel is legal. That is not being debated at this time. What the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) is saying is that he wants to tie the hands of the President in the future with regard to one of the six remaining terrorist states in the world. It is wrong. We should not tie the President's hands, and so I oppose the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute

to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, it is interesting how amendments make themselves to the floor, find their way to the floor with regard to the Cuban terrorist dictatorship, with language of freedom, talking about education, talking about reunification, talking about students.

Over 100 pro-democracy activists, leaders in Cuba met last month at great risk to their lives and to their families' lives, and they met publicly for the first time in 46 years. They held a convention. Many of them were not permitted to arrive. State security kept them in their homes, threw them in prison, but over 100 did arrive at the convention.

They met there and for the first time in 46 years they had elections and they elected leaders of the prodemocracy movement. They issued positions calling for the release of political prisoners and democracy, free elections. And they sent us a letter, Mr. Chairman, signed June 24, the three leaders of the Assembly to Promotes Civil Society.

They asked us in this letter with great respect for the decisions of a sovereign Congress, to reject each and every amendment that was going to be presented this week, either completely or partially eliminating sanctions against the dictatorship. And the dictator, Mr. Chairman, has gone on his state television, obviously, the only channel that belongs to him, and has said, ``A severe response'' awaits those mercenaries.

The omnipotent, totalitarian dictator, Mr. Chairman, until one day, omnipotent, goes on television and says ``a severe response'' awaits. The Cuban people know what that means. At any moment these leaders or their families will be thrown in dungeons and subjected to the torture that thousands of political prisoners are subjected to in Cuba each day and hundreds of thousands have been subjected to for 46 years.

Now, this letter, should we give it the credence and authority and respect that its courage, its heroism demands? I believe we should. This is a very serious issue. We have a policy to help the Cuban people and not the jailers of the Cuban people, not the oppressors of the Cuban people.

Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).

Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute

to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.

I would ask all of colleagues who may be watching this debate to realize this is a very serious issue, that the policy of the United States is a well-thought through policy. It permits travel for educational reasons, humanitarian reasons, family reasons. There are 13 categories of legal travel.

Remember, it is terrorist state that has shot down Americans just years ago, that has the head of its air force indicted for murder of American citizens, shot down over the straits of Florida. It has the head of its navy indicted for drug trafficking. It is a terrorist state, one of six remaining states.

So these are serious issues. We must keep this policy to deny hard currency to the regime while permitting the 13 categories of legal travel.

Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, just 2 years ago three young men, three young black Cubans, tried to leave Cuba to come to the United States for a better life; obviously fleeing the oppression of the totalitarian regime. They were captured by the dictatorship and, under orders of the dictator, they were summarily executed.

The distinguished gentleman from New York at that time stated, and I saw his quote in a New York newspaper, La Prenza, ``I am shocked,'' he said. ``There is nothing that the Cuban government could tell me that would interest me. It is totally incredible that a government would justify this type of action. The execution of these people puts an end to any possible discussion there could have been.''

Now, that was 2 years ago. What we have seen in the interim, further repression, further torture of political prisoners, and, just in the last 2 months, more than 500 young men, over 90 percent of them black, have been rounded up by the dictatorship in Cuba and thrown in prison under what is known as preventive, preventive detention. And they are thrown in the most brutal of gulags under the concept of preventive detention.

That is what is new since the author stated that he was shocked. Also what is new, what is current, is that there are indictments at this time against the head of the Air Force of the Cuban dictatorship for murder of American citizens, indictments at this time for drug trafficking against the head of the navy of the Cuban dictatorship; that 15 spies of the dictatorship have been sent to prison in the United States in the last year alone for spying against American interests. That is what is new. What would be rewarded, in effect, Mr. Chairman, by the amendment if it were to pass.

This is a normalization of relations amendment that would reward the most brutal conduct by the only dictatorship in the Western Hemisphere. I ask our colleagues to reject it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mack).

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

Mr. Chairman, the previous speaker asked as to the relevance of the fact that the dictator had summarily executed three young black Cubans 2 years ago. It is quite relevant and it is quite consistent with the fact that the dictator has consistently embarked on policies of hatred against the Cuban people, especially the black people of Cuba, which should not surprise anyone, because at the end of the 19th century, his father was sent to Cuba as a member of the Spanish Army that was fighting against Cuba. He is, in effect, the historical revenge of Spanish colonialism.

And, yes, the prisons are full of young men and women, especially young black men, that he summarily rounds up and puts under preventive detention. This is a very relevant issue, Mr. Chairman. It is very relevant. The oppression of the Cuban people and the hatred of the dictator against the Cuban people, especially the black people, it is very relevant.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).

Madam Speaker, by direction

of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 341 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

(Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, the rule provides 1 hour of general debate evenly divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule also provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

I would like to take just a minute, Madam Speaker, to reiterate that we bring this rule forward under an open rule. Historically, appropriations bills have come to the House governed by an open rule, and we continue to do so, in order to allow every Member of this House the opportunity to submit amendments for consideration, obviously as long as they comply with all of the Rules of the House.

Madam Speaker, the legislation before us appropriates over $20 billion, an increase of $73 million, for operations across the globe. The bill is fiscally sound while, at the same time, compassionate and globally responsive to the needs of those plagued by disease and international disaster.

The bill bolsters the President's Millennium Challenge Corporation to $1.75 billion, nearly a quarter of a billion dollars more than in fiscal year 2005. The expansion of assistance is meant to help bring economic security and the rule of law to some of the most of the poorest nations of the world. The Millennium Challenge provides assistance through a competitive selection process to developing nations that are pursuing political and economic reforms basically in three areas, Madam Speaker: ruling justly, investing in people, and fostering economic freedom. Economic development genuinely succeeds when it is linked to free market economic principles as well as to democracy and where governments are committed to implementing reform measures in order to achieve these goals.

Two years ago in his State of the Union address, President Bush announced the President's emergency plan for AIDS relief, the largest international health initiative in history initiated by a single government to address one disease. This bill shows Congress's continued support of the fight against HIV/AIDS, as it includes over $2.6 billion to continue the fight against that horrendous deadly disease.

Our resolve to help all those across the globe who fight this disease is strong; it is serious. In addition to funding, the Federal Government enlists the expertise of various agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration, which assures that the medicines we send to the developing world are safe and effective to help those with HIV/

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

With regard to some of the many, many points that were made by my distinguished friend, and I am certainly not going to address them all at this point, but I would like to make two points with regard to this foreign aid bill which we are bringing to the floor today with an open rule. We are providing over $20 billion in foreign aid in this bill. That is an increase of $73 million over last year. We are fulfilling our obligations and being quite compassionate as we do so.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of our support for veterans. A few weeks ago, as a matter of fact, on May 25, this House of Representatives brought to the floor, considered and passed by a vote of 425 to 1 the appropriations bill for the next fiscal year on military quality of life. The legislation included over $28 billion for the Veterans Health Administration, including $21 billion for medical services. Medical services were funded $1.6 billion above the current fiscal year. Over the last 2 years, funding for the veterans medical care has increased by 18 percent.

We are very proud of our support for veterans. And I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, that I know of no two Members of this House who feel and have more concern for the rights of veterans than the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), as well as the chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) of the appropriations subcommittee that funds veterans affairs.

So this matter brought to our attention now of a shortfall is of extreme concern to them. And as we speak, Mr. Speaker, a hearing is taking place to fully investigate the causes and the issues of this shortfall, a hearing is taking place by the appropriations subcommittee dealing with this issue, Military Quality of Life Appropriations Subcommittee, called for by the chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh). And so not only are we not ignoring the issue, we are proud of our record of support for veterans and will continue to support veterans in a way which will make us all proud.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life of the Committee on Appropriations.

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

We will get to the bottom of this problem. We will solve it, and we have heard from the chairman of the appropriations subcommittee that has jurisdiction over the veterans issue to that effect. We will hear as well shortly from the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and when I say we are going to get to the bottom of this and solve it, it is coming from the history of the House of Representatives that in the last 2 years alone has increased funding for veterans medical care by 18 percent. We are very proud of our record, and we are going to continue to have a record to be proud of.

So having said that, I would simply like to remind any colleagues who may be following this debate that with this rule what we are doing is bringing to the floor the foreign aid bill, the foreign operations appropriations bill, which includes about $22 billion, the foreign aid bill, includes about $22 billion, and it is almost $100 million over the amounts that we appropriated for the current fiscal year. That is what we are bringing to the floor again, Mr. Speaker, with this rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that my good friend from Florida, as he was wrapping up his remarks, as always with eloquence, talked about the ``yes'' votes and the ``no'' votes, because just 1 month ago, Mr. Speaker, when this House brought forth the bill to fund the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, the appropriations bill to fund Veterans' Affairs, there was a very interesting ``yes'' and ``no'' vote on this floor; 425 yes and 1 no.

So I simply want to put in context what has been said today. If we would be acting with such unfairness on the majority side, if we would be neglecting the interests of those men and women who we all hold in such admiration, then why was the vote to fund Veterans' Affairs 425-1 only 1 month ago?

As we have heard from the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, from the authorizing committee, and the chairman as well of the Subcommittee on Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations on these issues brought to our attention subsequent to that vote of 425-1, they are being addressed. They are being delved into. They will be solved. And we will continue to be proud of our record of support for our veterans.

Now, with regard to what this rule does, the rule we have been discussing today, it brings forth for consideration by this body the foreign aid appropriations bill, over $20 million in foreign aid. A lot of important programs, humanitarian programs; support for allies and friends; for poor people throughout the world; for the sick and the infirm. It is a good piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker.

So at this time, Mr. Speaker, I would request that the underlying legislation, the foreign operations legislation, be supported, as well as the rule that brings it forth, which is an open rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Florida is as follows:

Previous Question on H. Res. 341 Rule for H.R. 3057 Foreign Operations,

Export Financing, and Related Programs FY06 Appropriations

At the end of the resolution, add the following new

sections:

Sec. 2. Notwithstanding any other provision of this

resolution, the amendment printed in section 3 shall be in

order without intervention of any point of order and before

any other amendment if offered by Representative Edwards of

Texas or a designee. The amendment is not subject to

amendment except for pro forma amendments or to a demand for

a division of the question in the committee of the whole or

in the House.

Sec. 3. The amendment referred to in section 2 is as

follows:

Amendment to H.R. 3057, as Reported Offered by Mr. Edwards of Texas

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the

following new title:

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 342 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

(Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, the rule provides 1 hour of general debate, evenly divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. It provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

I would like to take a moment to reiterate that we bring this rule forward under an open rule. Obviously, historically, appropriations bills have come to the House floor with open rules; and we continue to do so in order to allow every Member in this House the opportunity to submit amendments for consideration, obviously as long as they are germane.

This is the last rule bringing forth an appropriations bill for the fiscal year 2006, Mr. Speaker; and I think that it speaks very highly of the Committee on Appropriations. Obviously, the chairman and the ranking member have had much to do with that, as well as all of the members of the Committee on Appropriations who have worked very hard in bringing forth all of these appropriations bills in such a timely fashion.

The bill that we are bringing forward today appropriates over $66 billion for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and independent agencies, an increase of 6 percent over last year. The bill is fiscally sound. It represents our commitment to provide necessary resources for programs and projects throughout the Nation, ranging from transportation, to housing, the Judiciary, the Executive Office of the President, the District of Columbia.

As all Members of this House know, the transportation infrastructure of the country is really the backbone of the economy, and its continued strength is essential to foster economic growth. The underlying legislation brought forth today goes far in ensuring that we have a reliable and stable transportation infrastructure to continue to help the economy grow.

The bill includes $37 billion in funds for the highway system, representing an increase of almost $2 billion. H.R. 3058 includes $14.5 billion for the Federal Aviation Administration, an increase of $887 million. Included in that amount is $25 million to hire and train 595 new air traffic controllers. I think it is vitally important as air traffic controllers retire and air traffic continues to grow. This is really essential to so many of our districts.

In my district, home to Miami International Airport, the third largest international airport in the country, without an increase in the number of air traffic controllers, MIA would not be able to continue its projected growth and continue to serve really as the hub of the Americas.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development is funded at $37.5 billion, an increase of $1.5 billion. These funds will permit the Department to administer programs that assist the public with housing needs, economic and community development, and fair housing opportunities. These funds will also empower low- and moderate-income residents towards self-sufficiency.

Under HUD, the bill includes funding for such important programs as Tenant Based Rental Assistance, also known as section 8; and Project Based Rental Assistance. These two programs serve almost 3.5 million households with vouchers and project-based housing. The bill includes $20.63 billion in funds for the program, an increase of almost $1 billion. In Miami-Dade County alone, which I am honored to represent, the housing authority uses the funds provided through these programs to house over 30,000 residents and for payment vouchers for 16,000 units.

H.R. 3058 provides $5.8 billion for the judiciary, an increase of 6 percent over the current fiscal year. This will fully fund the courts' revised requests for security improvements at Federal judicial facilities and enable the courts to effectively process the priority criminal, civil, and bankruptcy cases.

This legislation was introduced by the chairman of the subcommittee, who has done a tremendous job, the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg), and reported out of the Committee on Appropriations on June 21 by voice vote. It is good legislation. It is essential to our continued commitment to the security and safety of all in the United States, and we bring it forth under a fair and open rule.

Again, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Knollenberg) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), for their leadership on this important piece of legislation. I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and underlying legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), the chairman of the subcommittee, who, along with the chairman of the full committee, have done tremendous work in bringing forth these pieces of legislation, including the one on the floor today.

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

I think this is a very important piece of legislation that deserves our support. And, obviously, the rule bringing forth the underlying legislation in an extremely fair manner, with an open rule, deserves our support, but also the underlying bill, the underlying appropriations bill. It grows, it increases over last year by approximately 6 percent. It provides over $66 billion for the Departments of Transportation and Treasury and HUD, the Judiciary, and Independent Agencies. That is an increase of six percent, Mr. Speaker.

Now, we hear from our friends on the other side of the aisle more requests for spending, more and more and more and more. But I think it is important to keep in mind that what we are bringing forth, the bill that we are bringing forth to the floor increases spending, this bill increases spending by 6 percent over the current fiscal year. I think sometimes perspective is proper. So I wanted to mention that as I reiterate my support for the rule bringing forth this legislation as well as the underlying legislation and asking colleagues to support them both.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

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

Mr. Speaker, a couple of points to put the debate back in the perspective and the context of what we are doing today. We are debating the rule bringing forth the appropriations bill that funds the Department of Transportation, Treasury, Housing Urban Development, the Judiciary. This bill includes over $66 billion. It provides to those Departments being funded an increase of 6 percent over the current fiscal year, an increase of 6 percent.

A number of issues have been brought out, for example, the issue of an amendment that was passed in the Appropriations Committee. The substance of that amendment was debated September 10 of the year 2003 here on the floor of this House on an authorizing bill, and again, this may sound technical to some folks, especially if they are watching on TV, the rules of the House say that appropriations bills should not be vehicles for legislating, in other words, for changing the law. Rather, they are vehicles to fund, to appropriate the Federal Government.

Now, on an authorizing bill, which is expected and called for in the rules of the House, this credit card issue was brought forth and it was debated. Again, September 10, 2003. The amendment by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) on this issue was defeated 272-142. So I think it is important to mention that because facts, I think, should be relevant to debates.

And then, Mr. Speaker, again, the issue of tax cuts. We hear time and time again, no matter what the issue before us, tax cuts for the wealthy, tax cuts for the wealthy. The policies under the leadership of President Bush that we have put into law, including tax relief have benefited all taxpayers. Every taxpayer, every payer of Federal income tax in this country received tax relief. Obviously, if you paid more in taxes than someone else, and everybody gets relief, you get more relief than if you pay less taxes. But everybody obtained tax relief under our policies.

And I think it is relevant to put in context what has happened to the economy ever since we implemented those measures. Ever since we provided tax relief to the American taxpayer: 3 million jobs in the last 18 months alone, unemployment rate at 5 percent.

I think it is relevant, Mr. Speaker, when we hear these attacks continuously against the policies of the majority, I think it is relevant to learn, to note what those policies have accomplished. And the creation of over 3 million jobs in 18 months, an unemployment rate almost at record lows are something that I think all of us should be proud of.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I wished to do when my good friend from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) had the floor, I wanted to ask him a question. I was trying to understand and I was a little confused.

Does the gentleman admit that 3 million jobs have been created in the last 18 months in this economy?

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

So the gentleman's answer is yes or no?

Maybe the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) could answer. Have 3 million jobs been created in the last 18 months, yes or no?

Reclaiming my time, I think, Mr. Speaker, what I have heard is yes. And I think that what we have seen is remarkable, considering that we had a recession that began toward the end of the year 2000 and that was coupled by the unprecedented attack on in country, including on our economy and on our way of life on September 11, 2001. Despite that unprecedented attack, the policies, yes, under the President's leadership that this Congress instituted have permitted and have incentivated the creation of 3 million jobs in the last 18 months.

We have a record, almost a record low unemployment rate of 5 percent. And I think that despite the static from which I am trying to learn, understand the answers of my respectful questions, the answer is yes. It is a remarkable achievement.

And so to keep in mind and in perspective of what we have seen, Mr. Speaker, job growth, almost a record low unemployment rate, and with regard to what we are doing today, which I think is relevant to remember and put in context. What we are doing today is bringing forth legislation, the appropriations bill on the funding the Treasury Department, Housing and Urban Develop Department, the Department of Transportation, that includes a 6 percent growth, 6 percent growth over and above the legislation for the current fiscal year.

I think the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) has done a great job. I think the Committee on Appropriations has done a great job.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank all the colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have participated in this very interesting debate.

We are bringing forth the last of the appropriations bills with this rule. I think it is a remarkable achievement, and I think the gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis) really deserves commendation as do all on the Committee on Appropriations. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) has done a great job on this bill.

This particular bill that we are bringing forth with this rule is the Treasury and HUD, Transportation bill. I am not sure if it is the bill that increases the most from the current fiscal year, but it certainly has to be one of the most significant increases at 6 percent. We hear from our friends on the other side of the aisle requests and demands for further spending and for further government growth; and obviously, that is legitimate, that debate is very legitimate.

I think it is also important and legitimate to put in context that this bill which has caused so much angst in terms of it being categorized as insufficient in spending from the other side of the aisle includes 6 percent more than the current fiscal year.

So it not only is an important piece of legislation, but it is funded, obviously, at a very high level.

With regard, again, to points that were made, so many of them were made by colleagues who took the floor. It is an undeniable fact, Mr. Speaker, that the economic downturn began in the third quarter of the year 2000.

It is an undeniable fact that September 11 of 2001 this country suffered a tremendous, unprecedented and horrible criminal attack. That obviously contributed to the economic downturn.

It is also an undeniable fact that due to the policies, certainly it is an undeniable fact that there have been 3 million jobs created in the last 18 months, that the unemployment rate is about 5 percent, and I think we all should be proud of that.

It is important to put in context, in the context of what has happened in the economy, I think, the attacks which we have heard so repeatedly, as though we were living in a different reality. The reality we are living is one of 3 million jobs being created in the last 18 months. The reality we are living is one that reflects one of the lowest unemployment rates in history. It is fair to point that out.

And I think it is fair to point out, yes, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) talked about we will have a debate on the Cuban dictatorship. I am sure we will. There is a lot to report in terms of the repression and torture and the continuation in the local prisons and so much more. So, yes, we will probably see amendments to loosen sanctions on that dictatorship, amendments that, if passed and if they became law, would see flows of hard currency going to that dictatorship. We will have that debate, but at the end of the day, I am confident that this Congress will continue to stand with those who suffer and those who are repressed and not those who cause the repression.

So, Mr. Speaker, again, support the underlying legislation which I think, again, we owe a debt of gratitude to the entire Committee on Appropriations not only for having it brought it forth in such a timely way but especially the chairman who will now soon take the floor. We have much to commend, and I know that we have all of the chairmen we see here, the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) on the floor as well, so many who have worked so hard to make sure that all of these bills have come forth in really a remarkably timely way.

So, again, I am supporting the underlying legislation, as well as this very fair rule, which is an open rule and urging support for both by all of our colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Alexis Rodriguez Fernandez, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez is a member of both the Christian Liberation Movement and the Movement of Cuban Young People for Democracy. Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez believes in bringing freedom to an island enslaved by the nightmare that is the Castro regime. Unfortunately, Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez has been a constant target of the dictatorship.

According to Amnesty International, in January 2002, Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez was attacked and threatened by plain clothes state security agents and later abandoned in a remote area. In March 2003, as part of Castro's heinous crackdown on peaceful pro-democracy activists, Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez was arrested. Subsequently, in a sham trial, he was sentenced to 15 years in the totalitarian gulag.

Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez is currently languishing in an infernal cell in the totalitarian gulag. These depraved conditions are truly appalling. The State Department describes the conditions in the gulag as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' The State Department also reports that police and prison officials beat, neglect, isolate, and deny medical treatment to detainees and prisoners. It is a crime of the highest order that people who work for freedom are imprisoned in these nightmarish conditions.

Let me be very clear. Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez is languishing in these depraved conditions because he believes in freedom. He believes in freedom of religion and human rights for every Cuban citizen. It is intolerable that freedom fighters like Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez are locked in gulags 90 miles from our shore because they believe in fundamental human rights.

Mr. Rodriguez Fernandez is one of the many heroes of the peaceful Cuban democratic movement who are locked in the dungeons of the dictatorship for their beliefs. They are symbols of freedom and democracy who will always be remembered when freedom reigns again in Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, it is condemnable and unconscionable that any person can be sentenced to 15 years in the grotesquely inhuman quarters of Castro's gulag for a belief in democracy. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Alexis Rodriguez Fernandez and every prisoner of conscience in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 334 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

(Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 334 is a structured rule that provides for the consideration of H.R. 2985, the fiscal year 2006 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, as well as five amendments. The rule provides for one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member on the Committee on Appropriations. It also provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today appropriates $2.87 billion for the operations of the legislative branch of government. The bill is fiscally sound and includes a modest 1.7 percent increase from the last fiscal year. It provides over a billion dollars for the operation of this House of Representatives.

This includes funds for Members' representational allowances, leadership, and committee offices. These funds will help our Members fulfill their duties to legislate, represent their constituencies, and oversee the executive branch. These funds are very important in that they provide for that possibility, which is constitutionally mandated, Mr. Speaker, oversight of the executive branch. The Constitution grants Congress broad powers that include the oversight power. This includes getting to know what the executive branch is doing, how programs are being administered, by whom and at what cost, and whether officials are obeying the law and complying with legislative intent.

For the Capitol Police, the bill appropriates over $239 million. Also included is an Inspector General for the Capitol Police to help them with their financial management.

The bill also includes an important piece of legislation, H.R. 841, the Continuity in Representation Act of 2005. As we all know, on September 11, 2001, Flight 93 was headed toward Washington, D.C. If it were not for the truly heroic acts of the passengers on that flight, we could have been facing a situation where Congress would not have been able to function.

We have to do everything possible, Mr. Speaker, to prevent this from being a possibility even in the future. H.R. 841 would accelerate elections in case of a terrorist attack on the House of Representatives, in case such a terrorist attack left the House with over 100 vacancies. It provides for the expedited special election of new Members to fill seats left vacant in extraordinary circumstances.

The House of Representatives passed this bill earlier this year by an overwhelming bipartisan margin of 329-68. In the 108th Congress, the House passed a similar bill, H.R. 2844, by a vote of 306-97. However, each time the Senate has failed to consider this vital piece of legislation. I think it is time that we have legislation that can handle such a horrible possibility and does not leave our constitutional duty to legislate and oversee in limbo.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2985 was introduced by Chairman Lewis and reported out of the Appropriations Committee on June 20 by voice vote. It is a good bill, essential to our continued ability to legislate, to our power of oversight, and to the continuity of our government. I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee for their leadership on this important issue, as well as the subcommittee. I urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying legislation.

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

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

This is an eminently fair rule. With regard to the issue of the continuity of government, twice before legislation has been brought to the floor on that issue, and there has been an extensive debate. So we certainly feel that the House has had a sufficient and very fair opportunity to consider this issue. In addition, as I stated before, the legislation we are bringing to the floor today includes H.R. 841, the Continuity in Representation Act of 2005, that is very specific on this issue. One of the great leaders in the House on the issue of making certain that even in a time, God forbid, of great crisis again in the Nation and specifically in the Congress, the Congress can function, is the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

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

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

We are bringing forth a very important appropriations bill today, with an issue that has received a tremendous amount of discussion and study and debate and actually has been voted on twice in overwhelming fashions by this House favorably. The last time, in the 108th Congress, the measure on the continuity of government, specifically of this House, which is included in the underlying legislation, had passed with 329 favorable votes and only 68 negative votes. Mr. Speaker, 122 of our friends on the other side of the aisle voted for this piece of legislation.

By the way, the rule, Mr. Speaker, by which we bring forth this legislation, also is permitting, as an amendment, a motion to strike that legislation by the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird). His alternative was debated previously in this Congress and received 63 votes; and we are, as I say, we are permitting him, under this rule, to strike, if he has the provision on the continuity of the House. So we are bringing this legislation forth in a very fair way.

In addition to the very important legislation which is included that has to do with, as we have heard debate about today, that has to do with continuity of this House in case of an emergency, the underlying legislation also provides for the funding of the legislative branch of government, and it does so in an efficient and effective way, and in a way which I think deserves the support of the entire membership of this House.

So, Mr. Speaker, I ask for the support of our colleagues for the rule and the underlying legislation being brought forth by the rule.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Alfredo Manuel Pulido Lopez, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Pulido Lopez is a dentist, an independent journalist and a member of the Christian Liberation Movement. He believes in writing and speaking the truth about the nightmare that is the Castro regime. As a dentist, trained in protecting and nurturing human life, he could not tolerate the tyrant's incessant abuse of Cuban people. He understood the human condition and he knew that freedom is infinitely superior to the ills of tyranny and repression.

On March 18, 2003, as part of the dictator's condemnable crackdown on peaceful pro-democracy activists, Mr. Pulido Lopez was arrested because of his belief in liberty over repression. In a sham trial, he was sentenced to 14 years in the inhuman, totalitarian gulag.

Mr. Pulido Lopez' wife, Rebeca Rodriguez, described the abhorrent treatment of her husband in a phone call with Reporters Without Borders. She said:

My husband has 11 ailments, seven of them chronic. They

include high blood pressure, liver problems, malnutrition and

migraines aggravated by cervical osteoporosis. He has

permanent bronchitis which affects his breathing and gastric

problems that are the cause of rectal bleeding. I don't know

all of the problems. The prison officials know. But my

husband has not been hospitalized since August 2004. He is in

a critical condition and that's the price paid by all those

who have wanted to defend human rights in Cuba.

Reporters Without Borders also reports that Mr. Pulido Lopez he has been placed in solitary confinement. According to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2004, he has been ``held in `punishment cells,' which usually were located in the basement of a prison, with continuous semi dark conditions, no available water, and a hole for a toilet.'' This is in addition to the grotesque depravity of the gulag that also includes beatings, isolation, denial of medical treatment to detainees and other forms of condemnable abuse.

Mr. Pulido Lopez is a brilliant example of the heroism of the Cuban people. No matter how horrifically brutal the consequences of a dignified struggle for liberty, the totalitarian dungeons are full of men and women of all backgrounds and ages who represent the best of the Cuban nation.

Mr. Speaker, we must speak out and act against this abominable disregard for human rights, human dignity, and human freedom just 90 miles from our shore. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Alfredo Manuel Pulido Lopez and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Chairman, the way that the Cuban people will regain their dignity is to regain their freedom. While they are oppressed by a regime that denies them all human rights and denies them their dignity, they will not be able to live as all peoples are meant to.

Let us remind ourselves what we are dealing with here. As the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) stated, there are five remaining terrorist states in the world, after the fall of Saddam Hussein and the liberation of Iraq. Five remaining terrorist states. But the FBI will tell you, and I would request our colleagues seek this information and this briefing from the FBI, that the most aggressive and dangerous anti-American espionage service of those five terrorist states remaining is the one of the Cuban dictatorship.

Yes, it is a bankrupt economy. Castro does not care about the suffering of the Cuban people. He does care about one thing, though: Intelligence services to fight against the interests of the leader of the free world, the United States. Nineteen Cuban agents, designated as spies, were expelled from the United States in recent years because of their work as spies. Fourteen members of Castro's spy network have been indicted and are in Federal prison today.

The President of the United States, a year ago, after much study, came forth with a very serious and comprehensive policy, which is very similar to the Reagan administration's policy towards the Soviet Union. One of the ingredients of President Bush's policy with regard to the Cuban dictatorship, one of five remaining anti-American terrorist states, is the reduction of hard currency to that regime.

Now, as was stated by the majority leader, Castro extorts payment even on humanitarian packages, at both ends of the process. The bottom line is that these regulations permit humanitarian aid to continue. Our constituents are the ones who send that humanitarian aid.

Mr. Chairman, it is important to defeat this amendment. I thought I heard it all on this floor, but to hear a thugocracy called a fledgling democracy is something I never thought I would hear here. It is a regime of gangsters by gangsters and for gangsters, against which President Bush has a very important and solid policy that will succeed. Cuba will soon be free.

Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues today is to continue to stand with the Cuban people against the thugocracy and to defeat this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about Horacio Julio Pina Borrego, a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Pina Borrego is a pro-democracy activist in totalitarian Cuba. He is a member of the Party for Human Rights in Cuba. Because of his belief in freedom, democracy, and human rights, Mr. Pina Borrego has been a target of the nightmare called the Castro regime.

According to Amnesty International, in 2001 Mr. Pina Borrego was detained by the tyrant's security thugs. However, despite constant harassment, and the ever present threat of being thrown in the gulag for his beliefs, Mr. Pina Borrego bravely persisted in advocating for human rights and freedom.

On March 19, 2003, as part of the dictator's condemnable crackdown on peaceful pro-democracy activists, Mr. Pina Borrego was arrested because of his belief in freedom and human rights. In asham trial, he was sentenced to 20 years in the inhuman, totalitarian gulag.

Mr. Pina Borrego is currently languishing in an abhorrent, inhuman cell in the totalitarian gulag. These depraved conditions are truly appalling. The State Department describes the conditions in the gulag as, ``harsh and life threatening.'' The State Department also reports that police and prison officials beat, neglect, isolate, and deny medical treatment to detainees and prisoners, including those convicted of political crimes. It is a crime of the highest order that people who work for freedom are imprisoned in these nightmarish conditions.

Because of courageous Cuban men and women, like Mr. Pina Borrego, freedom and democracy are on the march in Cuba. These pro-democracy activists languish in abhorrent dungeons, they defy the dictator's machinery of repression and, despite every threat and obstacle, these opposition leaders continue to demand liberty for the people of Cuba. Through their bravery and because of their unwavering commitment and the hard work and commitment of countless other patriots, Cuba will be free again.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Pina Borrego is suffering in a grotesque gulag because he believes in human rights. My colleagues, we cannot allow peaceful pro-democracy activists to languish in the depraved prisons of tyrants. We must demand immediate and unconditional freedom for Horacio Julio Pina Borrego and every prisoner of conscience in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about Omar Pernet Hernandez a political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Pernet Hernandez is the leader of the National Movement for Human Rights. As a peaceful advocate for freedom, democracy and human rights, he has been a constant target of the totalitarian tyranny.

In March 2003, as part of Castro's condemnable crackdown on peaceful pro-democracy activists, Mr. Pernet Hernandez was arrested. In a sham trial, he was sentenced 25 years in the totalitarian gulag.

Despite being confined in the abhorrent, subhuman conditions of the gulag, Mr. Pernet Hernandez continues to advocate for human rights for all Cubans, including participating in a hunger strike to demand the humane treatment of political prisoners. According to Amnesty International, he is suffering from lung problems, a chronic gastric ulcer, and high blood pressure. Let us be very clear, Mr. Pernet Hernandez is languishing in the gulag because of his belief in human rights.

According to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2004:

Prison conditions continued to be harsh and life

threatening, and conditions in detention facilities also were

harsh . . . Police and prison officials beat, neglected,

isolated, and denied medical treatment to detainees and

prisoners, including those convicted of political crimes or

those who persisted in expressing their views. Political

prisoners in particular often were held at facilities

hundreds of miles from their families, placing an undue

hardship on many families' time and financial resources.

Mr. Pernet Hernandez is representative of the Cuban people's desire for liberty; despite constant harassment, despite incarceration in a grotesque gulag, he continues to fight for the inalienable human rights of the Cuban people. It is a crime against humanity that Castro's totalitarian dungeons are full of men and women, like Mr. Pernet Hernandez, who represent the best of the Cuban nation.

Mr. Speaker, it is totally unacceptable that brave men and women are locked in dungeons because they believe in freedom, human rights, and the rule of law. My Colleagues, we must demand the immediate and unconditional release of Omar Pernet Hernandez and every political prisoner in totalitarian Cuba.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 291 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only.

(Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 291 is an open rule that provides for the consideration of H.R. 2419, the Fiscal Year 2006 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule also provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

I would like to take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to reiterate that we bring forth this resolution under a fair and open rule.

Historically, appropriations bills have come to the floor of the House governed by open rules. We continue to do so in order to allow each and every Member of this House the opportunity to submit amendments for consideration, obviously as long as they are germane under the rules of the House.

This legislation before us today, Mr. Speaker, appropriates almost $30 billion for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Departments of the Interior and Energy, and several independent agencies. This bill is truly fiscally sound, representing a reduction of $131.7 million from the fiscal year 2005 legislation and the same spending level as was requested by the President in his budget request. At the same time, Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides the resources necessary to address the energy and water needs of the United States.

H.R. 2419 provides $4.7 billion for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps is the world's premier public engineering organization, responding to the needs of the Nation in peace and in war. For over 200 years the Corps has been involved in such important missions as flood control, shoreline prevention, navigation and safety on the waterways of this great Nation. The vital work of the Corps will continue under this act, which includes a vigorous civil works program.

The bill also includes a number of significant changes to improve project execution and financial management, including more responsible use of reprogramming, continuing contracts and implementation of long- term financial planning.

I would like to highlight a Corps project of particular interest to my community, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program. The restoration of the Everglades, that wonder of nature, is the largest and most significant environmental initiative that this country has ever undertaken. The legislation continues our commitment to the restoration of this environmental treasure with an appropriation of $137 million. I am pleased to report that Everglades restoration is moving forward expeditiously and effectively. Congress, and the Committee on Appropriations especially, should be proud of this environmentally sound action.

The National Nuclear Security Administration, which includes the nuclear weapons program, defense nuclear nonproliferation, naval reactors and the Office of the Administrator, is funded at $8.8 billion, an increase of $24 million over fiscal year 2005. I am glad to see that the appropriators increased this program. Nonproliferation is essential to the defense of the homeland. Our work across the globe, especially in Russia, makes it ever more difficult for rogue states and terrorists to obtain the weapons necessary to attack the United States or our Armed Forces abroad or our allies.

I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis) and the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson) for truly extraordinary work on this important legislation. I urge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to support both the rule and the underlying bill.

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

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

With regard to an amendment that was allegedly not made in order, I want to reiterate, Mr. Speaker, that we brought forth this legislation under an open rule. Obviously, an amendment has to be germane and not violate the rules of the House. We very much attempted to bring forth this appropriations bill under an open rule, and we are pleased that we were able to do so, and obviously that permits the amendment process to be wide open and obviously fair.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), my distinguished friend and a great leader in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 291.

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

This is an important appropriations bill, and it is one that we are pleased, obviously, to bring forward under the great tradition of open rules. So I very strongly support not only the underlying legislation but also the rule, and I would ask for an affirmative vote by all of our colleagues on the previous question as well.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.