SPEAKERS       CONTENTS       INSERTS    
 Page 1       TOP OF DOC
21–401PDF
2005
EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING THE MASSACRE AT SREBRENICA IN JULY 1995; AND TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006 AND 2007, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON
H. Res. 199 and H.R. 2601

 Page 2       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
MAY 26, 2005

Serial No. 109–87

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/internationalrelations

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey,
  Vice Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
PETER T. KING, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
RON PAUL, Texas
DARRELL ISSA, California
 Page 3       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
JERRY WELLER, Illinois
MIKE PENCE, Indiana
THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida
JOE WILSON, South Carolina
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina
CONNIE MACK, Florida
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
MICHAEL McCAUL, Texas
TED POE, Texas

TOM LANTOS, California
HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
 Page 4       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
BARBARA LEE, California
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM SMITH, Washington
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California

THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel
ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director

Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California,
 Page 5       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
  Vice Chairman

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
BARBARA LEE, California
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
BRAD SHERMAN, California
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
DIANE E. WATSON, California

MARY M. NOONAN, Subcommittee Staff Director
GREG SIMPKINS, Subcommittee Professional Staff Member
NOELLE LUSANE, Democratic Professional Staff Member
LINDSEY M. PLUMLEY, Staff Associate

C O N T E N T S

MARKUP OF

    H. Res. 199, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the massacre at Srebrenica in July 1995

    H.R. 2601, To authorize appropriations for the Department of State for fiscal years 2006 and 2007, and for other purposes

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Thomas G. Tancredo, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado
 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Thomas G. Tancredo

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Barbara Lee, a Representative in Congress from the State of California

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Jeff Flake, a Representative in Congress from the State of Arizona

Amendments en bloc to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Jeff Fortenberry, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Betty McCollum, a Representative in Congress from the State of Minnesota

Amendments en bloc to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Brad Sherman, a Representative in Congress from the State of California

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Brad Sherman

Amendment to the amendment by Mr. Sherman to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Barbara Lee

Amendment to H.R. 2601 offered by the Honorable Brad Sherman

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from the State of New Jersey, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations:
Prepared statement on H. Res. 199
Prepared statement on H.R. 2601
Letter to Mr. Smith, dated May 26, 2005, from the Broadcasting Board of Governors

    The Honorable Betty McCollum: A Los Angeles Times article entitled ''Where Girls Marry Rapists for Honor,'' and a New York Times article entitled ''Turks Fight Honor Killings of Women''

    The Honorable Brad Sherman: Letter from Mr. Sherman to His Excellency Mahmoud Abbas, President, Palestinian Authority, and extract from a new 10th-grade Palestinian history book

EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING THE MASSACRE AT SREBRENICA IN JULY 1995; AND TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006 AND 2007, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

THURSDAY, MAY 26, 2005

House of Representatives,    
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights    
and International Operations,    
Committee on International Relations,
 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
Washington, DC.

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:05 p.m. in room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.

    Mr. SMITH. The Subcommittee will come to order.

    Pursuant to notice, I call up the resolution, H. Res. 199, regarding the massacre in Srebrenica in July 1995, for purposes of markup and move its recommendation to the Full Committee. Without objection, the resolution will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point.

    [H. Res. 199 follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the resolution will be favorably reported to the Full Committee and I would like to offer some opening comments regarding this resolution.

    This resolution expresses the sense of Congress regarding the horrific massacre in Srebrenica in July 1995. I introduced this resolution, H. Res. 199, on April 6th and presently it has 15 cosponsors and that number is growing. The Senate version, S. Res. 134, was introduced by Senator Gordon Smith.

 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Last week at the Full Committee, Under Secretary of State Nicolas Burns noted the 10th anniversary of Srebrenica is upon us. He mentioned specifically that this slaughter of approximately 8,000 men and boys who had sought refuge in that U.N. declared safe haven represented the worst atrocity in Europe since World War II. Just yesterday another State Department official responsible for the Balkans affairs also raised the anniversary at a Helsinki Commission hearing that several of us attended over on the Senate side.

    Clearly our Government is taking note of this event and the House, I believe, needs to be part of that effort, and this would bring a great deal of scrutiny and focus on that terrible atrocity.

    Srebrenica survivors, I would point out to my colleagues, are a closely knit group. This is quite understandable considering the horror that they experienced. They have waited long enough to know the fate of their missing relatives and friends. They are eager for the perpetrators to be brought to justice. The Srebrenica survivors who came to the U.S. as refugees, and are now American citizens, know about this resolution, and this action by the Congress is very important to them. It might help them find just a little bit of closure.

    Just last week I met with the Bosnian Prime Minister and he expressed his appreciation as well for H. Res. 199 as his country continued to recover from that horrible conflict in the Balkans.

    By considering this resolution we are not working in a vacuum. By moving it forward to the Full Committee for consideration we will have a positive effect on a country in which the United States has invested so much money and personnel, and we will have again a positive effect on trying to bring some closure to those who have suffered so much.
 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I yield to my friend Mr. Payne for any comments he might have.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS

H. RES. 199

    This resolution expresses the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the horrific massacre at Srebrenica in July 1995. I introduced House Resolution 199 on April 6, and it presently has 15 additional co-sponsors. The Senate version, S.Res. 134, was introduced by Senator Gordon Smith.

    To begin, let me make a few small comments on this resolution. Last week, at full committee, Under Secretary of State Nick Burns noted the 10th anniversary of Srebrenica is upon us. He mentioned specifically that this slaughter of approximately 8,000 men and boys who had sought refuge in that UN-declared safe haven represented the worst atrocity in Europe since World War II. Just yesterday, another State Department official responsible for Balkan affairs also raised the anniversary at a Helsinki Commission hearing I attended. Clearly, our government is taking note of this event, and the House needs to be part of that effort.

    Srebrenica survivors are a closely knit group. This is quite understandable considering the horror they experienced. They have waited long enough to know the fate of their missing friends and relatives. They are eager for the perpetrators to be brought to justice. The Srebrenica survivors, many of whom came to the United States as refugees and are now American citizens, know about this resolution, and this action by the Congress is important to them. It might help them find closure. Just last week I met with the Bosnian Prime Minister, and he expressed appreciation for H.Res. 199 as his country continues to recover from the horrible conflict ten years ago.
 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    By considering this resolution, therefore, we are not working in a vacuum. By moving it forward for full committee consideration, we will have a positive effect on a country in which the United States has invested much money and personnel. We will have a positive effect on real people who went through something it is frankly hard to talk about.

    Finally, July 11 is the date that this massacre will be commemorated. Legislatively, that does not give us much time. I therefore hope I can count on bipartisan support as this resolution moves forward.

    Mr. PAYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I commend you and strongly support the resolution which commemorates the massacre at the Bosnian town of Srebrenica in July 1995. It recognizes what happened in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995 as genocide. The amendment underlines the importance of bringing war criminals to justice and serves as a useful reminder for our Government and to others of the consequences of failing to take adequate action in response to aggression and genocide.

    The importance of reminding our Government of the tragic mistakes of the past cannot be understated, particularly in light of the ongoing genocide in Darfur and the lack of international response and decisiveness in preventing the Government of Sudan from continuing the genocide. The best way to memorialize those who died in Srebrenica is to remind this Administration that its lack of interest in Darfur is a great mistake. If we fail to act decisively, we may again find ourselves in full regret when commemorating yet another genocide years from now. We have to really become more focused on the tragedies that are going on.

 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    And so once again, Mr. Chairman, I support this. It is a good and wise resolution. I urge my esteemed colleagues to support it.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you. Any amendments to the resolution?

    If not, without objection, the resolution will be reported favorably to the Full Committee, and any Member who has a statement on this, we will include it in the record. And without objection, the staff is directed to make any technical and conforming changes.

    Pursuant to notice, I now call up the bill, H.R. 2601, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007, for purposes of markup and move its recommendation to the Full Committee. Without objection, the bill will be considered as having been read and open for amendment at any point.

    [H.R. 2601 follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. I yield myself such time as I may consume for an opening statement.

    Today we are meeting to authorize funding for the administration of foreign affairs, international organizations, international commissions and related appropriations and to authorize appropriations for refugee affairs for fiscal years 2006 and 2007. This legislation, commonly known as the State Department authorization bill, funds the all-important framework by which the United States carries out its foreign aid and foreign policy programs, as well as authorizes United States contributions to the United Nations, NATO, the OSCE and other vital international organizations.
 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    This Subcommittee has conducted numerous hearings in preparation for consideration of this legislation, including hearings on management initiatives of the State Department, an examination of Embassy and border security issues, reform of United Nations peacekeeping and reform of the Commission on Human Rights and United Nations and other human rights bodies.

    H.R. 2601 authorizes $9.33 billion for the State Department and $652 million for international broadcasting activities for a total of $9.985 billion, an increase of 12.4 percent over fiscal year 2005.

    I have been very pleased to collaborate closely with my good friend and colleague, Mr. Payne, and other Members of this Subcommittee on both sides of the aisle on this very important legislation. Very briefly, since the scope of the bill is so large, let me mention a few important areas that the bill addresses.

    First, I have always maintained that ''personnel is policy.'' How we treat the men and women of the Foreign Service who work at our Embassies overseas, many under dangerous and difficult conditions, makes the real difference in how the United States is perceived abroad and how well that job is done. H.R. 2601 properly addresses many of their concerns by increasing the ceiling on the differential pay for hardship and danger. It begins to close the 16 percent gap between the base pay of officers stationed in Washington and those stationed overseas created by years of DC-locality pay increases.

    The bill also authorizes increased funds for the Rangel Fellowship Program, a program to train and attract more minorities to the ranks of our diplomatic corps and continues the annual report on minority recruiting efforts at the State Department.
 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Finally, the 6.5 percent increase in the Diplomatic and Consular Program account will fund over 150 new staffing positions for increased needs in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Sudan, as well as enable increased language training and staffing for the Office of Stabilization and Reconstruction.

    Second, H.R. 2601 supports the belief of many Americans that the cornerstone of our foreign policy should be the promotion of American values; that is, the protection and advancement of fundamental human rights of people around the world. This bill authorizes many important human rights initiatives, increased funding for the Office of Democracy and Human Rights and Labor, strengthening of United States support for democracy and stabilization in Haiti, creation of programs to fight against anti-Semitism and protect religious freedom in OSCE countries, permanent authorization for Radio Free Asia, and scholarships for outstanding individuals from the southern Sudan region to study in the United States.

    Some of the most vulnerable people in the world are refugees, and this bill contains strong funding for refugee programs to protect those fleeing danger and hunger from Sudan to North Korea and to support their resettlement in the United States and other countries. H.R. 2601 also more than doubles U.S. contributions for international peacekeeping.

    In the vital area of public diplomacy, H.R. 2601 includes a 10.2 percent increase for international broadcasting, $429 million for education and cultural exchanges and $334 million for public diplomacy programs.

    Finally, this bill also strengthens America's hand against terrorism both at our Embassies overseas and at home. In August 1998, the world was shaken by the terrorist bombings of the United States Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Among the results of those despicable acts was the appointment of the accountability review boards for each incident chaired by Admiral William Crowe. Admiral Crowe testified before this Subcommittee in 1999 and confirmed the finding of the Crowe Report—that over 85 percent of all U.S. diplomatic overseas facilities did not meet security standards established as a result of the 1985 Bobby Inman report findings.
 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    As a result of that hearing and consultation with the State Department and interested parties, inadequate levels of funding were identified for capital improvements and worldwide security, and Congress responded with a major new funding package. I would point out that I was the prime sponsor of H.R. 3427, the Admiral James W. Nance and Meg Donovan Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 and 2001, the Embassy Security Act, which among other things authorized $900 million per year for 5 years for Embassy security, construction and maintenance.

    Since that time, 15 major capital projects have been completed, including new Embassy and consulate compounds as well as USAID annex buildings, and another 39 projects are under construction or design.

    Security initiatives contained in the pending bill include $1.5 billion for security-related construction of U.S. Embassies, $690 million to increase security for diplomatic personnel and $930 million for border security programs. These requests include funding for 55 additional diplomatic security personnel positions and 55 new consular positions. Under the Capital Security Construction Program, eight new Embassy compounds and four USAID annexes would be funded.

    In conclusion, I urge the Committee's support for H.R. 2601. This bill gives our diplomatic service the resources and tools it needs in this post-9/11 environment to promote U.S. interests and values abroad and to protect American citizens here at home.

    I yield to Mr. Payne for any comments he might have.
 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS

H.R. 2601

    Today we are meeting to authorize funding for the administration of foreign affairs, international organizations, international commissions, and related appropriations, and to authorize appropriations for refugee affairs for fiscal years 2006 and 2007.

    This legislation, commonly known as the State Department authorization bill, funds the all-important framework by which the United States carries out its foreign aid and foreign policy programs, as well as authorizes U.S. contributions to the United Nations, NATO, the OSCE, and other vital international organizations.

    This Subcommittee has conducted numerous hearings in preparation for consideration of this legislation, including hearings on management initiatives of the State Department, an examination of Embassy and border security issues, reform of United Nations peacekeeping, and reform of the Commission on Human Rights and United Nations other human rights bodies.

 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    HR 2061 authorizes $9.33 billion for the State Department and $652 million for international broadcasting activities, for a total of $9.985 billion, an increase of 12.4% over FY 05.

    I have been pleased to collaborate closely with my good friend and colleague, Mr. Payne, and other Members of this subcommittee from both sides of the aisle on HR 2601. Very briefly, since the scope of this bill is so large, let me mention a few important areas that this bill addresses.

    First, I have always maintained that ''personnel is policy.'' How we treat the men and women of the Foreign Service who work at our Embassies overseas, many under dangerous and difficult conditions, makes a real difference in how the United States is perceived abroad. HR 2601 properly addresses many of their concerns by increasing the ceiling on differential pay for hardship and danger. It begins to close the 16 percent gap between the base pay of officers stationed in Washington and those stationed overseas created by years of DC locality pay increases. The bill also authorizes increased funds for the Rangel fellows program, a program to train and attract more minorities to the ranks of our diplomatic corps, and continues the annual report on minority recruiting efforts at State. Finally, the 6.5% increase in the Diplomatic and Consular Programs account will fund over 150 new staffing positions for increased needs in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Sudan, as well as enable increased language training and staffing for the Office of Stabilization and Reconstruction.

    Second, HR 2601 supports the belief of many Americans that the cornerstone of our foreign policy should be the promotion of American values, that is, the protection and advancement of fundamental human rights of people around the world. This bill authorizes many important human rights initiatives—increased funding for the Office of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor; strengthening of U.S. support for democracy and stabilization in Haiti; creation of programs to fight against anti-semitism and protect religious freedom in OSCE countries; permanent authorization for Radio Free Asia; and scholarships for outstanding individuals from the southern Sudan region to study in the United States. One of the most vulnerable people groups in the world are refugees, and this bill contains strong funding for refugee programs to protect those fleeing danger and hunger from Sudan to North Korea and to support their resettlement in the United States and third countries. HR 2601 also more than doubles U.S. contributions for international peacekeeping.
 Page 18       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In the vital area of public diplomacy, HR 2601 includes a 10.2% increase for international broadcasting, $429 million for Education and Cultural Exchanges, a 17% increase, and $334 million for public diplomacy programs (a 5% increase).

    Finally, this bill also strengthens America's hand against terrorism both at our Embassies overseas and at home. In August 1998 the world was shaken by the terrorist bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Among the results of those despicable acts was the appointment of Accountability Review Boards for each incident, chaired by Admiral William Crowe. Admiral Crowe testified before this subcommittee in 1999, and confirmed the finding of the Crowe report that over 85 percent of all U.S. diplomatic overseas facilities did not meet the security standards established as a result of the 1985 Inman report findings.

    As a result of that hearing and the inadequate levels of funding identified for capital improvements and worldwide security, Congress responded with a major new funding package. I was the prime sponsor of HR 3427, the Admiral James W. Nance and Meg Donovan Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001 (The Embassy Security Act), which among other things, authorized $900 million per year for five years for Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance.

    Since that time, 15 major capital projects have been completed, including new embassy and consulate compounds, as well as USAID annex buildings, and another 39 projects are under construction or design.

    Security initiatives in HR 2601 include $1.5 billion for security-related construction of U.S. Embassies, $690 million to increase security for diplomatic personnel, and $930 million for border security programs, increases of 1.5%, 5.4% and 7.6% respectively. These requests include funding for 55 additional diplomatic security personnel positions and 55 new consular positions. Under the Capital Security Construction program, eight new embassy compounds and four USAID annexes would be funded.
 Page 19       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In conclusion, I urge the committee's support for HR 2601. This bill gives our diplomatic service the resources it needs in this post 9–11 environment to promote U.S. interests and values abroad and to protect American citizens at home.

    Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for calling up the State Department authorization bill for 2006 and 2007, H.R. 2601, and also for the previous legislation 199, which we passed.

    The State Department authorization bill we are considering authorizes funds for things ranging from the Department's operations, funding for international organizations, as you have indicated, Embassy security and personnel issues, to education and cultural exchange programs and scholarship programs.

    I will be very brief in my statement, because we have quite a few amendments to consider. But I would like to thank the Chairman for his inclusion into the base text of several provisions from the Democratic side, including language seeking the return of institutions such as the African Development Bank to their original location or other countries in the region of their original location; the funding of $500,000 in scholarships for southern Sudanese who have been devastated by years of brutal war by the Government of Sudan and Khartoum and utter neglect and underdevelopment by the same government, for these students to come to the United States to study; a report on progress of certain efforts in Haiti to assist in the disarmament of armed groups and in the reform of the police and in stabilization efforts in that country.

 Page 20       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Also, a report on the hiring and retention of minorities by the State Department, which will be issued by the State Department, so that we can move forward on our goals to try to increase diversity in the State Department. And finally, I would like to also thank the Chairman for the inclusion of the Charles B. Rangel Fellows International Affairs Program, at $1.5 million, which encourages young African Americans and Latino students to take interest in foreign service. This was already a part—was authorized in the past and we are just asking for its reauthorization.

    So, Mr. Chairman, these are just a few of the provisions which you incorporated into this bill, and I commend you for that action. It is an important bill and I thank you for your cooperation and the consideration of the requests from this side of the aisle. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. SMITH. Mr. Payne, thank you very much. Chairman Royce had a brief comment.

    Mr. ROYCE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I commend you and I commend the Ranking Member for the introduction of this legislation because it aims to give our State Department the tools that are necessary to carry out our Nation's foreign policy.

    I wanted to say that key to that effort is going to be a vigorous public diplomacy apparatus like what we had in the 1980s in Eastern Europe and in the former Soviet Union. International broadcasting is key and today we must be as sharp as ever at it. The 9–11 Commission warned us that if we do not define ourselves in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do it for us. I believe we are still struggling to get international broadcasting right, and I think it is an area where we have got to put a great deal more attention.
 Page 21       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I would also like to thank the Chairman for working with me to include language on the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Initiative. Its predecessor was the Pan Sahel Initiative, which really worked to boost antiterror capabilities in Mauritania, in Mali and Niger and in Chad, and produced promising results with very modest means.

    I had an opportunity in January to visit one of the special brigades that had trained in Chad. This particular brigade had taken down 47 terrorists allied with al-Qaeda, and I think the effort to expand the PSI into the TSCTI so that countries across the Sahara are able to bolster their capability to deny terrorists sanctuaries is a much needed development on the African continent.

    The United States Government must respond to Africa's growing strategic importance, and this program when fully implemented will be an important step in that direction. I look forward to continuing to work with the Chairman and Ranking Member Payne as this bill moves through the House, and I thank you very much for the opportunity to say a few words about those two initiatives.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Chairman Royce. Any other Members? Mr. Sherman.

    Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is the most important bill that our Subcommittee may—I think our Full Committee will deal with. I will be offering many amendments and I thank in advance my colleagues for their indulgence. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for including in the base bill language to say that Iran is not a democracy and should be. And I also thank the Chair for whatever accommodation he can offer on the various amendments that I will be putting forward.
 Page 22       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The first of these deals with section 620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act. That provision says that we do not give money to states that sponsor terrorism.

    What we need to do, though, is to say that we can give money to those who are trying to bring democracy to countries like Iran and Syria. While we have provided that kind of specific language on a year-by-year basis, we ought to provide that in this bill so that it is clear that our effort to keep money out of the hands of the mullahs in Tehran does not keep money out of the hands of those trying to bring democracy to Iran.

    I will bring an amendment on the sense of Congress dealing with the A.Q. Khan network, and I know my friend, Barbara Lee, will offer a perfecting amendment on that. I was prepared to author, but will prefer to work with Full Committee staff, on a amendment that makes it clear when we do not allow technology to go to terrorist countries such as Iran, that that does not prevent us from funding and contracting with NGOs trying to bring democracy to Iran and similar countries.

    We certainly do not want Iran to get their hands on any technology that would help that regime, but if the NGOs are simply buying things at Staples, computer programs and software at Staples, certainly they are not breaching our tough security export regime.

    I will hold off and not offer an amendment dealing with Iran getting loans from the World Bank. I will offer an amendment urging the Secretary of State to help us rationalize the reports that we insist on from the State Department, both in terms of their content and sometimes just in terms of their timing so that those civil servants working on them can do so efficiently.
 Page 23       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I will offer an amendment allowing civil service personnel to move back and forth between USAID and the State Department as they are increasingly one agency.

    And finally I will offer an amendment dealing with the textbooks published by the Palestinian Authority and I will bring to the attention of this Subcommittee the flaws even in the new textbooks that are being put forward.

    I thank you for your indulgence.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Sherman.

    Are there any amendments to the bill? I know that Mr. Tancredo has one. I propose that we go back and forth between the Majority and the Minority for consideration of amendments.

    Mr. Tancredo.

    Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment.

    The CLERK. We have two for you.

 Page 24       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. TANCREDO. We will do the Taiwan first. That is fine with me.

    Mr. SMITH. No objection.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Tancredo. At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following new section——

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. TANCREDO. The purpose of the amendment is to help open lines of communication between the government leaders of Taiwan and their counterparts here in the United States. The amendment makes it clear to the U.S. Department of State that they should not take actions to prevent high-level exchanges between the Government of Taiwan and the Government of the United States. The amendment also encourages the Department of State to cooperate with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Taiwan to help facilitate future meetings between high-ranking government officials in our two countries.

    I have to make some things clear. My amendment does not do a couple of things. First, it does not change existing law. Second, it does not change our current China policy, even though I do not agree with that policy. This amendment is simply an attempt to help improve our communications with one of our oldest friends and allies.
 Page 25       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Public Law 103–416 says that the President of Taiwan or any other high-level Ambassador should be admitted for discussions with U.S. Government officials about important policy issues unless he or she is excludable under the immigration laws of the United States.

    Despite this, the State Department, influenced by Beijing's continuous indignant bluster, makes it nearly impossible for President Chen or Vice President Annette Lu or other high-ranking Taiwanese officials to travel to Washington, DC even for routine meetings with Administration officials. Instead these officials are often confined to cities far from the Nation's capital and only then as a point of transit en route to another country.

    The U.S. Government has determined that a democratic and de facto independent Taiwan is in the best interest of American security. In fact, our Government finds it so important, that under the Taiwan Relations Act, we facilitate the sale of defensive arms to Taiwan to help them maintain the capacity to resist a hostile invasion from the PRC. One of those sales is currently in the works but is moving slowly because of political gridlock in Taiwan.

    Wouldn't it be nice if the leaders of our two countries could talk about this? If it is in our best interest to help Taiwan defend itself, then it most certainly is in our best interest to communicate directly with Taiwan's democratically-elected leaders and high-ranking cabinet officials, regardless of whether or not that communication might ruffle a few feathers in Foggy Bottom or in Beijing.

    We host all kinds of leaders in Washington because a two-way dialogue is important for maintaining and improving our cultural, economic, and security interests around the world. Just this week, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas was here in Washington. His meetings with United States officials are important ones because the Middle East is a dangerous place and keeping an open line of communication is important for all parties for our security interests. The Taiwan Strait is in many ways an equally dangerous place and it is equally important to our security to maintain a similar line of open communication with both Taiwan and China.
 Page 26       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I move the amendment.

    Mr. SMITH. Would anybody else like to be heard on the amendment of Mr. Tancredo?

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Tancredo, I do not have a copy of your statement in front of me so I want to make sure I do not misinterpret what you said. Am I interpreting correctly that you said it is in the best interest of the United States to have a free and independent Taiwan? Something to—if you could read that section again, that would help me.

    Mr. TANCREDO. There is a free and independent Taiwan. That is not in dispute, even in American policy. It is just in our interest to communicate with them. That is really all I was saying.

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Tancredo, then is your intention not to change the ''One-China'' policy with this amendment moving forward?

    Mr. TANCREDO. I am sorry, I was distracted.

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. It is not your intention to change the ''One-China'' policy with this amendment?

    Mr. TANCREDO. No, it is not my intention to change our policy with regard to Taiwan and China with this amendment. It is my intent to simply allow for communications to exist—easily exist between our Government and the Government of Taiwan.
 Page 27       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. SMITH. Additional comments? If not, the question occurs on the amendment by Mr. Tancredo.

    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

    Opposed, no.

    The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. I understand Mr. Tancredo has a second amendment.

    Mr. TANCREDO. I do, Mr. Chairman, and I have an amendment at the desk.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Tancredo of Colorado——

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read and Mr. Tancredo is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his amendment.

    [The amendment referred to follows:]
 Page 28       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

    Mr. SMITH. The gentleman from New Jersey reserves a point of order.

    Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we have a situation developing with our neighbor to the south that is becoming really intolerable. There are at the present time well over 4,000 people—by best estimates from the DA in Los Angeles County—over 4,000 people who have fled to Mexico to escape prosecution in the United States for the crime of murder. That is to say there are warrants out for them. We have instance after instance of the most horrendous crimes being committed in the United States by people who are here illegally or who are here and then flee—even here legally but flee to Mexico for purposes of being able to avoid extradition to the United States.

    The Government of Mexico has become extraordinarily difficult to deal with on this issue and has made it more and more difficult for us to even extract individuals for crimes that they consider the punishment to be cruel and unusual.

    It started out that they refused to extradite people back to the United States if they faced the death penalty because they called that cruel and unusual. Then not too long thereafter they considered that even life imprisonment was cruel and unusual punishment.

 Page 29       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Now we are negotiating that they want us to determine in many instances exactly what the penalty would be for persons that they would extradite and it is a little subjective as to what they determine is cruel and unusual punishment.

    It is my belief, Mr. Chairman, that this action on the part of Mexico is really not designed to enforce any sort of moral code with regard to the issue of the death penalty or even life imprisonment in the United States, but it is a lever they hope to pull in order to also put pressure on us to deal with them in a different way in terms of immigration policy.

    And, you know, in my State, just recently Donald Young, a Denver policeman, was killed and another officer wounded earlier this month. The alleged assailant, Raul Garcia Gomez, was an illegal alien who came into contact with the Denver police on three separate occasions prior to the incident. He was unfortunately allowed to remain in the United States. Immediately after the incident, Mr. Gomez fled the city. His vehicle was found a short time after the manhunt began leading officials to believe that he escaped to Mexico. It was found in California, by the way, and not too far from the border.

    And there is the issue of David March. On April 29, 2002, David March, a Los Angeles County sheriff, was killed when he pulled over a car for a routine traffic stop. The driver was a dangerous Mexican drug dealer named Armando Garcia who had been deported twice and had a long history of violent crime. After shooting Sheriff March in the head execution style, he was allowed to escape to Mexico where officials refused to send him back for trial in the United States. He is also wanted for two other attempted murders. If convicted of March's murder in the United States, he would face life without possibility of parole, or death if the death penalty is not waived. Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley reportedly has declined to seek extradition in this case because of Mexico's interpretation of the extradition treaty.
 Page 30       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The case of Annabelle Avera—we could go on and on with these cases. But the point is that we need movement, movement on the part of Mexico in terms of negotiating with us to get these people back to the United States to be punished. As I say, now well over 4,000 people are hiding behind that position of the Government of Mexico. They don't extradite in order to avoid prosecution here.

    This is intolerable. It is intolerable to the people—the victims, the families of the victims—who seek justice, who know where these people are, know where they are in Mexico City. The Government of Mexico knows where these people are, and yet they in fact refuse to negotiate with us to get them back here and they do so, as I say, for reasons that I think are totally unrelated to any sort of moral principle about the death penalty.

    So my amendment, if it is made in order, is designed to simply encourage the Department of State to negotiate, and if they do not negotiate in good faith, if Mexico does not negotiate in good faith, we would not allow for these laser visa opportunities for people to come into this country on a daily basis.

    It is not the greatest penalty in the world. Believe me there are things I would much rather do. There are much more serious penalties I would like to apply. But this is a start. And because I really do not have many other opportunities to effect this situation with regard to the extradition penalties, that is why I—well, I am trying to decide actually what to do in this situation as my colleague, Mr. Payne, has raised a potential point of order.

    Mr. Chairman, I suppose I will withdraw this amendment and hope that we will be able to work with you and determine a way in which it can be brought forward, maybe at the Full Committee, without any possibility of a point of order. So I do at this point withdraw.
 Page 31       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH. I appreciate my friend for withdrawing the amendment, because regrettably there is a problem with the fact that the Attorney General is the one who has the responsibility to enforce this. But let me just say that I do sympathize with the gentleman and will work with him as we go forward. Because this may not be the right tool by which to send that message that we are concerned, but I think you raise a very valid concern that we all share. So thank you for raising this issue again and for withdrawing the amendment.

    Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. SMITH. The Chair recognizes Ms. Lee.

    Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment.

    The CLERK. I have three for you.

    Ms. LEE. Should I do two and then the other perfecting amendment when we get to Mr. Sherman?

    Mr. SMITH. We only have one amendment, so——

    Ms. LEE. You have three?
 Page 32       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The CLERK. I have three for you.

    Ms. LEE. Okay. Let me—Mr. Chairman, let me—may I ask which amendments they have? Because one may be incorporated into the manager's amendment. The other is a perfecting amendment to Mr. Sherman's amendment.

    Mr. SMITH. This would be the one on racial diversity? Point 16——

    The CLERK. Contracting?

    Ms. LEE. Right, contracting and famine relief in sub-Saharan Africa.

    The CLERK. Both?

    Ms. LEE. The famine, I am going to withdraw the famine relief but I would like to talk about it.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the amendments en bloc. Why don't you put the one up?

    Ms. LEE. Okay. The one that I am going——

 Page 33       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. SMITH. Clerk will report the amendment.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Ms. Lee of California. At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following section, blank——

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes in support of her amendment.

    Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the Ranking Member, Mr. Payne, and the staff, including my staff, your staff, and the Minority staff also for incorporating the first amendment on minority recruiting and the recruiting of women in the State Department in terms of the base of this legislation.

    In this critical moment in American foreign policy, we must make certain that our State Department is putting our best face forward in all corners of the world. With the United States engaged in military operations in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq, on top of the diplomatic efforts to stabilize the Middle East, it is extremely important for us to do all within our power to make sure that the Department of State has access to the human resources and management capabilities that will repair our image and improve our relations with our allies in the world.

 Page 34       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I am particularly interested in the State Department's ability to draw on the cultural diversity of our Nation as it promotes diplomacy and development in countries and continents where many Americans have roots such as Mexico and Africa, China and Japan. But State Department recruitment and hiring is only one part of the equation. A significant component in creating a State Department that mirrors the diversity of our Nation is ensuring that it is contracting with minority- and women-owned businesses.

    According to the Congressional Research Service, there are at least six provisions of Federal law that encourage the State Department to contract with minority- and women-owned businesses. While these are important provisions, I believe, Mr. Chairman, we should have a better sense of whether these provisions are actually effective. That is why I am offering this amendment which would simply require the State Department to report on the number of minority- and women-owned small businesses and also compare this number to the overall number of businesses which it contracts with. In other words, we want to know the numbers and the percentages.

    In order to build a forward-looking State Department for the 21st century, we need to have all the facts at hand, so I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, once again, for incorporating the initial one in the base bill.

    Mr. SMITH. Anyone else wish to be heard on the amendment? Mr. Payne.

    Mr. PAYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to commend Ms. Lee and strongly support this amendment which extends the report by the Department of State on minority hiring and retention to include information on a number of small minority-owned businesses that provide goods and services to the Department as a result of contracts during the preceding year. It is a good amendment, and I think it goes to strengthen our State Department. It goes to strengthen just our country in general, and I urge support of the amendment.
 Page 35       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH. I recognize myself. I too support the amendment. And we did include, as you know, your amendment numbers 1 and 2 in the base text and number 3 strengthens and adds additional reporting. I think information is good and I think we need to know what they are doing with regard to contracting as well as other diversity in the State Department. I support it.

    The question occurs on the amendment offered by Ms. Lee.

    All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

    Opposed, no.

    The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to.

    Mr. Flake is recognized for his amendment.

    Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, excuse me, I have the second amendment that I am going to withdraw. May I speak to that now or later? Should I do it later?

    So I move to strike the last word. I intend to withdraw this amendment on the understanding that Chairman Hyde and his staff will work together with me on this amendment as the bill moves toward consideration by the Full Committee. But what this has to do with, Mr. Chairman, and Members, famines in Africa resulting from both drought and rainfall are affecting an increasing number of lives every year. There are people who are hungry, more hungry than ever today with fewer and fewer resources to address these crises. There are two critical factors that enable us to respond to food emergencies as they evolve. One is our ability to predict emergencies, and the second is our ability to respond in a timely way.
 Page 36       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    My amendment addresses both of these issues. In this amendment I have proposed a $10 million fund for a special demonstration project in Ethiopia through the World Food Program that will use weather derivatives as a basis for insuring vulnerable farmers against cyclical drought.

    Weather derivatives were first developed in the 1990s for insurance purposes in response to the deregulation of the power industry. This new methodology provided a secure financial vehicle for utility providers to manage their weather risk. Since its emergence, the use of weather derivatives for insurance purposes has expanded to other industries, including transportation and agriculture.

    What I have proposed is a bold new initiative that will apply this methodology to poor and vulnerable farmers in Ethiopia. This initiative will allow international donors to use capital markets to underwrite risk exposure from cyclical drought. It also establishes a mechanism to create contingency funding so that we will not have to wait until a crisis emerges to address it.

    In this project we will be able to pay farmers immediately after determination of need has been met that they can preserve their assets through the drought period rather than selling them off to feed their families. The second provision of this amendment will provide $8 million to support the Famine Early Warning System Network throughout vulnerable countries in Africa. While we depend heavily on this network to predict looming food shortages in Africa, it is really a stepchild of a sorts in the foreign assistance budget. With vulnerabilities to weather related droughts and floods increasing in Africa, it is imperative that we can shore up our ability to target the onset of the crisis early and provide information to our humanitarian assistance agencies to respond in a more effective manner.
 Page 37       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the staff, especially Pearl S. March, for helping us put this together. I led a codel to Ethiopia probably a year before last and this was one of the issues and problems that we noted and discussed with the NGOs in Ethiopia, and I believe that if we can work out the details of this amendment, this certainly would help the farmers in Ethiopia and the people of Ethiopia be better prepared for such droughts and floods which, of course, result in famine, and then help us to better respond.

    So I ask that the amendment be withdrawn but I ask that we work together as we move. Thank you.

    Mr. SMITH. The Chair recognizes Mr. Flake for his amendment.

    Mr. FLAKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Flake of Arizona. At the end of title I——

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read and the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his amendment. And do Members have a copy of that amendment? Which one is it? I haven't seen it.
 Page 38       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. FLAKE. Yes, it has been distributed.

    Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this amendment is simply to have a more effective policy, in particular communication policy, with the country of Cuba. We spend about $27 million a year, the U.S. taxpayer does, on Radio and Television Marti and we are proposing in this bill to actually spend $10 million more. And I would submit that before we spend more, we ought to assess the effectiveness of what we have spent with regard to TV Marti.

    TV Marti has been going since 1990. We have spent $10 million a year ever since then and very few, if any, Cubans have seen a minute of it, mostly because it is jammed by Fidel Castro. This extra $10 million spent is an effort to perhaps get around that jamming. However, we have been running planes up to get around that jamming for quite a while now for several months but we have no reports other than simple anecdotal evidence that anybody has seen any of this, and I would propose that before we spend more we ought to gauge the effectiveness of what has been spent.

    It is not just jamming that is the problem. It is more the content of what is produced on Radio and TV Marti that could be improved, and I will speak to that in a minute.

    Also in this bill, for some reason, we strike the provision that requires Cuban broadcasting to actually be under the standards that the Voice of America has. I have asked why this was done and nobody can explain why, but we pulled that standard away. This would insert the standard back again or remove that section which deletes it.

 Page 39       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Also to promote the best possible journalism at Radio and TV Marti, we require the Administration to develop an independent monitoring board to make sure that they are complying with the VOA standards. The $10 million that we would save from immediately being spent on a new plane we would designate for educational exchange programs in Cuba. This would use traditional programs that are developed by the State Department, Fulbright scholarships, Gilman scholarships, whatever is already there. We must like them because we are funding them in this same authorization bill.

    And then also this bill may fund—in the commission report on Cuba a while ago it was suggested that we spend $5 million in Europe to discourage European tourism in Cuba. So that seems to me to be a stretch. In January of this year, Fidel Castro issued an edict to all state employees, which is everybody on the island basically, saying to avoid contact with tourists because that contact was promoting individualism and they should seek to avoid it. I would suggest that individualism among Cubans is a very good thing. And the notion, it is a questionable one, that discouraging tourism is a good thing, and why are we spending taxpayer money in Europe in an attempt to discourage Europeans from travelling to Cuba?

    So it does these things. Let me take just in my time left and talk about Radio and TV Marti for a minute. The BBG, that is the broadcasting group that is over Cuba, most recent surveys show Radio Marti's regular weekly audience to be approximately 1.7 percent of the Cuban listenership. TV Marti is 0.3 percent. It is virtually gone. There is nothing there.

    Radio Marti used to be effective in Cuba, used to be listened to when it was produced from Washington. Since it has been produced out of Miami, the quality has gone down precipitously and we need to go to nobody other than our current Deputy Assistant Secretary over at the State Department for the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs. Before he took that post he said and I quote:
 Page 40       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

  ''Radio Marti once represented an important instrument for spreading the pro-freedom message in Cuba. Today it still retains the possibility, if only there was action to return it to neutral territory.''

    Moving the facilities to Miami sacrificed its effectiveness, making it simply another Miami radio station. Radio Marti should be relocated and every effort should be made to end its image as a mouthpiece of the Miami Cuban American community.

    I have traveled to Cuba several times. I have spoken to a number of dissidents and others and the complaint that I hear most often is, ''Let's get some content that is actually interesting or newsworthy to listen to.'' That is the biggest problem with Radio Marti. Moving it back under the standards, making sure the standards of VOA actually apply will go a long way toward doing that. Let me give you one example, there are many, of the kind of broadcasting that goes on right now.

    There is an American citizen by the name of Kirby Jones who formed a trade organization—I will do this quickly, I know my time is gone—to promote the United States law which allows ag sales in Cuba. We have traded about $1.3 billion worth over the last couple of years. Many here are very supportive of that. They identified him—this is our own TV Marti, founded by U.S. taxpayers—that he is performing initiatives favorable to the Castro Communist regime. They did not explain what initiatives, they never called them about it, no source was given. That is just an example of what goes on there.

    I would be happy to answer any questions about it. Thank you.
 Page 41       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you, would anyone else like to be heard? First of all, I would, with all due respect to my good friend and colleague from Arizona, would rise in very strong opposition to his amendment. One of the President's recommendations made to the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba was to require the Department of Defense to begin weekly aerial broadcasts of Radio and TV Marti to Cuba consistent with applicable law to break the regime's information blockade. As my colleague knows, those flights have begun. The jamming of all of our freedom broadcasts throughout the years, Radio Free Europe for years and Radio Free Asia, which continues in China and Vietnam; if when faced with the problem of jamming we closed down our operations, the very important public diplomacy goals that are realized of getting fair and hopefully totally unbiased information out would just grind to a halt.

    One of the recommendations made by the 9–11 Commission, and we had two hearings last August and I chaired both of them in the area of public diplomacy—there was a strong, strong attempt made by those commissioners to say if you want freedom, if you want democracy and the rule of law to be promoted, and if you want information to be had by the people who are getting one-sided propaganda from a dictatorship, you need to increase, not decrease, the amount of money that is invested into public broadcasting like Radio Marti and TV Marti.

    As we all know, Radio Marti was founded in 1985, TV Marti in 1990. Yes, the Government of Cuba goes overboard trying to stop TV Marti by jamming it, but now there is an innovative and very workable solution that President Bush, the White House, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors have embraced to set up an aerial platform. The $10 million that the gentleman would cut is for having a sustainable effort, an aircraft that would fly, as it does now, at least once a week, to pierce the jamming capability of Fidel Castro.
 Page 42       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    This is important, I would respectfully submit, right now in trying to get information out at a time when Castro has made things even worse. Two years ago, as we all know, there was a horrific crackdown on the best and the brightest and the bravest in Cuba, as my friend knows well. They—the secret police of Castro—even went after people who were librarians. Obviously, they went after the human rights activists and the labor activists, the Varela Project coordinators. But they went after librarians; trying to put a choke hold on the free flow—of any flow of information.

    So I would suggest if we allowed the Communist dictatorship in the Soviet Union or in Vietnam or the PRC or any other dictatorship in the world to frustrate us to the point where we close up shop, Radio Free Asia, Radio Liberty, Voice of America, all of the important public broadcasting activities would have been stopped.

    We all remember: The Iron Curtain is not soundproof. They tried and were often able to frustrate our effort to get that information through but we did get some of it through. Now, we have an opportunity, innovative, one that is working. I got the same information that you got, and it is anecdotal and there will be a survey done, that people are getting the TV Marti signal. TV is getting through.

    I would suggest that doing phone surveys are precarious at best, because if I got a phone call trying to survey whether I listened to TV Marti or watch it or listen to Radio Marti, I would be suspect about answering when I know that my phone is tapped. But we hear from emigres that they do watch it and listen to it.

 Page 43       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    And one final point. If we are close, and I hope to God we are close to a transition from a brutal dictatorship to democracy in Cuba, that as that transition period offers an opportunity, say Castro dies or becomes incapacitated in some way, we would need more than ever at that point to have the capability to get TV and radio broadcasting into Cuba so that we do not see a matriculation from one dictatorship right into another on this island gulag.

    I know that my friend has concerns and he has articulated them very well over the years. But the President and I think all of us who really believe in broadcasting believe that this is an opportunity. It is not perfect.

    I remember when people were saying we ought to cut National Endowment for Democracy. While it is not broadcast, it does promote democracy building. In the 1990s with the peace dividend and all the talk that we had turned the corner on dictatorships, and people like myself and others said, ''Time out, we cannot do that; there are dictatorships and movements afoot.'' Now we see what is happening terrorism-wise, who will always try to frustrate free and fair people and human rights protections.

    So again, and I finally, for the record, would ask every Member to take a look at a letter from Kenneth Tomlinson, the Chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, and I would quote him briefly and ask with unanimous consent the full letter be made a part of the record. He points out:

  ''Last August we began weekly flights of specially-equipped Pennsylvania National Guard C–130's and immediately Office of Cuban Broadcasting officials began receiving indications of a significant increase in the number of Cubans who reported that they were able to receive Television Marti signals. This prompted the Office of Management and Budget . . .''
 Page 44       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

We know how they always like to red out things. That is my comment, not his.

  ''This prompted the Office of Management and Budget, with strong support from the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, to support the purchase of a specially equipped airplane which could distribute the Marti signal daily.''

    [The information referred to follows:]


Broadcasting Board of Governors,
May 26, 2005.
The Honorable CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights
and International Operations.

    DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I join with colleagues in the Bush Administration in strong support for Television and Radio Marti and the purchase of a specially-equipped airplane with the capability of evading Castro's jamming.

    This jamming is especially insidious. Blocking the free flow of information violates a host of international communications agreements. How can anyone seek to block from any people information about what is happening in their own country and their own world? Yet this is what Fidel Castro is doing and up until recently his jammers effectively blocked the Cuban people from viewing the Television Marti signal and have interfered with the radio signal.
 Page 45       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Many times we have been asked how can the United States with all of its technological capability not be able to counter Castro's jamming? The fact of the matter is that terrestrial television and radio signals are vulnerable to the counter force of jamming and up until now there was little we could do about it.

    Last August we began weekly flights of specially-equipped Pennsylvania National Guard C–130's and immediately Office of Cuba Broadcasting officials began receiving indications of a significant increase in the number of Cubans who reported they were able to receive Television Marti signals. This prompted the Office of Management and Budget, with strong support from the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, to support the purchase of a specially-equipped airplane, which could distribute the Marti signal daily.

    Thank you very much for your interest in Cuba broadcasting, and I stand ready to respond to any questions that you and your colleagues might have.

Sincerely,
Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, Chairman.


    Mr. SMITH. So I would hope that my colleagues would reject this amendment and I would gladly recognize any other Member. Ms. McCollum.

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Could I ask the author of the amendment a few questions?

 Page 46       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. SMITH. Yes.

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. It is my understanding from reading this that you would like to take the dollar amount and put it into other opportunities that already currently exist. I notice on the last several lines of your amendment on page 4, you have radio broadcasting, in accordance with all subsections, should be in accordance with the Voice of America standards. So you are not looking to delete the Voice of America or anything like that into Cuba?

    So I would like to yield the remainder of my time to you, Mr. Flake. But a second before doing that. I did read the 9/11 Commission Report, as many of us here, and I do believe that the 9/11 Report, and I will go back and check, was referring and specifically referred to the Voice of Democracy when it was referring to its broadcasting in the report. And I yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Flake.

    Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. And you are right, I am not cutting 1 dime. Radio and TV Marti will still have the same amount of money that they had last year, not a dime less. What I am saying is that before we go and buy a plane, we actually—the letter mentioned that there is a platform, it is flying on an irregular basis. Let's find out if that is working. Let's get something more than anecdotal evidence that it is working before we expand another $10 million. And in the meantime, there are some very effective programs that are being run by the State Department in terms of communicating with students and others in other countries. We would simply apply them here to Cuba as well.

    I am not—again, I am not cutting 1 dime. I am saying before we make a significant expenditure, an additional expenditure, we ought to see if the platform is actually working, if we are actually achieving something. We need more, when spending 10 million more dollars, than simple anecdotal evidence, and even the background and history of the Marti is they could be far more effective. I am looking for a more effective voice there. We have reason to be suspicious that before they move forward with additional dollars, that we are effective with the dollars and more effective with what we are currently spending.
 Page 47       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I ask anybody who knows why in the world we would remove from this bill the section which requires these broadcasts to be under VOA standards. Because I can tell you, because there have been a lot of accusations that they are not. There is such bias in them. When I am down in Cuba and I ask people, ''Do you listen?'' It is, ''Why listen? It is the same old drivel. We have heard it before. We agree, Castro is a bad guy. Now let's get to some news and something that we will listen to, something that is valuable and something that is meaningful to us instead of the same old same old.''

    And we have been doing this for far too long. One hundred and fifty million dollars have been spent over the last 15 years with TV Marti, and nobody can point to anything but anecdotal examples out there that anybody has ever seen it. And it is simply not that effective. And when you couple that with the horrible standards that exist—get this: The most significant event that has happened in Cuba in terms of outsiders coming in and doing something—and I am not a fan of his politics—but Jimmy Carter was down there. And he did something that was extraordinary. He scolded Castro and spoke about the Varela Project, which many Cubans had not heard of. Courageous Cubans had gone around and collected 25,000 signatures, people saying we want a change in the government.

    Jimmy Carter's speech in Cuba was not carried live by Radio Marti. Our own broadcast out of here would not carry Jimmy Carter's speech live in Cuba, again one of the most substantial events that has happened there in decades and they refused to do that.

    There are problems there and instead of giving them another $10 million and putting off any scrutiny for a decade or so, we have been hearing that there is going to be a change in Cuba. We heard in 1992 that there was a book published, The Last Months of Castro. That was more than a decade ago. I think we have to say let's do what is right and take care of it from there. This is what is right.
 Page 48       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH. The time has expired. Dr. Boozman.

    Mr. BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have really been very supportive of the idea of trading and travel to Cuba in the sense that in my mind's eye my model is such that I really feel like you affect those countries more by interacting with them. Not only do you trade goods, but you trade ideas and things like that. If I did not feel like that, then I would be a hypocrite in the sense that we deal with so many other countries that have the same human rights problems that Cuba does, and yet we, again, do not have any problems dealing with them.

    I am troubled though. You know, it seems like for the first time that we are able with the TV Marti to kind of figure out how to do the jamming properly. If we had gotten rid of this thing, we probably should have done it a long time ago. So I am really torn. I think that because we are able to do that we need to go forward. And yet I am troubled. If this is true that we do not have the standards, if the standards were taken out, I do not understand.

    I have traveled the Middle East extensively and it is not only a problem with this broadcast. If you visit with anyone of any rank or whatever in the Middle East, the material that we are putting out there is a joke, nobody is listening to it.

    So I think we need to look at this hard. I think we do need a standard. We need to look at it here and do what we are doing in these other areas and this thing about the travel, if we are spending $5 million of the taxpayers' money to discourage travel to Cuba in Europe, I don't know about the rest of my colleagues, but we have lots of places in Arkansas that we could put that to use to a much greater ability.
 Page 49       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So thank you.

    Mr. SMITH. We do have four votes pending, so I would ask the Members to be brief so that we could go to a rollcall vote on this.

    Mr. Sherman.

    Mr. SHERMAN. I rise to oppose the amendment. I think broadcasting is one of the most effective things we can do to bring the message of democracy. So perhaps Radio Marti could do better, and I hope they do. The proof that they are of some significance is the fact that Castro is spending money to jam the broadcasts. And if this was getting through to absolutely no one and it was a complete joke, I doubt Castro would block. Clearly that jamming is adversely affecting the viewership and listenership of Radio and TV Marti. The solution is not to cut it off and yield to the jamming; the solution is to spend the money on the technology so that people can hear—hear truth, hear democracy.

    And I hope, though, that Radio Marti will listen to some, including the gentleman from Arizona, in terms of what they can do to make their broadcasts have more resonance and a higher rating and better content. I yield back.

    Mr. SMITH. One final word, Mr. Payne.

    Mr. PAYNE. I will be very quick. I saw the USSR, same thing. I went there in 1967. We were able to have some contact. We got more Europeans and Americans to go there. Then along came perestroika and glasnost, the mighty Iron Curtain started to fall. I was in Cuba 2 years ago. Walked around and stopped by a jazz club and talked to people. They were criticizing, I have all of this education and can't get a job. Things seem to be loosening up a little bit. If we had more trade and visitations—we all know that Castro is a bad guy. Seven Presidents have said it and he outlived them all. I don't know how many more he will outlive but we could start by having contact.
 Page 50       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We heard some people on the telephone about 2 months ago saying how bad Castro was. They are not in prison now. Evidently things are not as bad as they can be. I think that we should have contact—if Cuban Americans could go to Cuba and talk to their relatives this would be a change. I think our policy is totally wrong and I support the Flake amendment.

    Mr. SMITH. Before going to the vote I thank my colleagues for this debate but vigorously oppose the amendment by Mr. Flake. The Office of Cuban Broadcasting, as I think my colleagues know, was established under the charter of the Voice of America, and as such the office was established to operate under VOA guidelines, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasts already has an independent board. And as regards to reporting requirements, the office has been subject to countless reviews and audits not to mention congressional hearings since its inception.

    Again, the $10 million that would be taken out of this bill, and out of the President's request, is designed precisely to improve the efficacy of TV Marti so the signal is received by the people in Cuba.

    Mr. FLAKE. Would the gentleman yield for 30 seconds?

    Mr. SMITH. Yes.

    Mr. FLAKE. Can you explain why the section was removed that actually ensures that it complies with VOA standards?

    Mr. SMITH. Well, it has to comply with VOA standards.
 Page 51       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. FLAKE. Why did we remove the subsection that does that?

    Mr. SMITH. I will check—have staff check and find out why it was removed and we will talk about that as we go to Full Committee.

    I would like to ask all those in favor of the Flake amendment to say aye. Opposed, no. In the opinion of the Chair the noes have it.

    Mr. FLAKE. Rollcall.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will call the roll.

    The CLERK. Mr. Royce.

    Mr. ROYCE. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Royce votes no.

    Mr. Tancredo.

    Mr. TANCREDO. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Tancredo votes no.

 Page 52       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. Flake.

    Mr. FLAKE. Aye.

    The CLERK. Mr. Flake votes aye.

    Mr. GREEN. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Green votes no.

    Mr. Boozman.

    Mr. BOOZMAN. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Boozman votes no.

    Mr. Fortenberry.

    Mr. FORTENBERRY. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Fortenberry votes no.

    Mr. Payne.

    Mr. PAYNE. Yes.
 Page 53       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The CLERK. Mr. Payne votes yes.

    Ms. Lee.

    Ms. LEE. Yes.

    The CLERK. Ms. Lee votes yes.

    Ms. McCollum.

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. Aye.

    The CLERK. Ms. McCollum votes aye.

    Mr. Sherman.

    Mr. SHERMAN. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Sherman votes no.

    Mr. Meeks.

    Mr. MEEKS. Aye.

 Page 54       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    The CLERK. Mr. Meeks votes yes.

    Ms. Watson.

    Ms. WATSON. No.

    The CLERK. Ms. Watson votes no.

    Mr. Smith.

    Mr. SMITH. No.

    The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes no.

    Mr. SMITH. And the number is?

    The CLERK. There are 5 ayes and 8 noes on this vote.

    Mr. SMITH. And the amendment is not agreed to. The Subcommittee stands in recess until after the votes on the House Floor, and I would urge all Members to return. We do have several other amendments pending to this legislation.

    [Recess.]

    Mr. SMITH. The Committee will resume its hearing. I would like to thank Betty McCollum, who would be next in the queue, for yielding to Mr. Fortenberry for offering his amendments.
 Page 55       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. Fortenberry.

    Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I have two amendments at the desk. First, I ask unanimous consent to be considered en bloc.

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection they will be considered en bloc.

    Clerk will report the amendment.

    The CLERK. Which amendment?

    Mr. SMITH. En bloc. So whichever one you want to start with is fine.

    Mr. Fortenberry, Benjamin Gilman scholarships?

    Mr. FORTENBERRY. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. Okay. One second.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Fortenberry. At the appropriate place in the bill——

 Page 56       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendments en bloc will be considered as read. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his two amendments.

    [The amendments en bloc referred to follow:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much. When I was an 18-year-old, a sophomore in college, I had a very unique opportunity to travel to Egypt, spending several months there during what would have been my fall semester of college. Here now, 25 years later, I find myself a Member of the International Relations Committee. I recently had the opportunity to sit across the desk from the Prime Minister of Egypt, the Foreign Minister as well. That was an essential part of my early formation, an important part of my education.

    The amendment I would offer would increase authorization for the Benjamin Gilman Scholarship Program by striking $1.5 million from the current text and inserting $4 million. America has sacrificed to provide military solutions in the pursuit of peace and freedom overseas, and when necessary we will continue to do so.

    But in the years since World War II we have also accomplished much by projecting various forms of soft power to build lasting relationships around the globe. Educational and cultural changes introduced the world to our best and brightest young students, reducing stereotypes and encouraging long-term relationships.

    The Gilman Scholarship Program shows the world that America treasures educational access for all—these are students that qualify for Pell Grants at home. Gilman scholarships empower many to travel, study and live abroad.
 Page 57       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    After 9/11 many around the globe feared an American cultural withdrawal from our own borders. This fear, however, was not shared by the students in our colleges and universities. Study abroad increased by 8.5 percent in 2002 and 2003 to a record 174,000.

    The Gilman program actually expands the pool from which these students come and guarantees that the privilege of study abroad be made widely available. I urge the inclusion of this amendment and the authorization of the expansion of this worthy program.

    Mr. SMITH. I want to thank my friend for offering these amendments. I essentially concur and agree with him. I think the two amendments add to this bill. The Gilman scholarships, as you have pointed out so well, and the increase you contemplated in your amendment will make this very real possibility of studying abroad for many more individuals a reality.

    In terms of taking the Country Reports, Human Rights Practices, the Religious Freedom Act and annual reports submitted that are country-specific, as well as the Trafficking in Persons Report, and to translate that into the indigenous language, I don't know why we didn't think of that before.

    It is amazing to me when you travel abroad how many people—you give them their country report or you tell them that there is something online. If they can't read it what good is it? Now they will have it in their own language. That will make not only the chronicling of human rights abuses but also the fights against those abuses that much more effective.
 Page 58       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    These are two outstanding amendments, and I strongly support them.

    Mr. FORTENBERRY. If the Chairman would yield.

    Mr. SMITH. I will.

    Mr. FORTENBERRY. You have very well summarized the second amendment which very well translates human rights reports or mandates that the Embassies must put them in their native indigenous language on their Web site, allowing more people access to these very important points. Thank you. I move the amendment.

    Mr. SMITH. The question occurs on the amendments en bloc.

    All those in favor, say aye. Opposed, no.

    The ayes have it. The amendments en bloc are agreed to.

    The Chair recognizes Ms. McCollum.

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also would like to thank you for your help and your great assistance from the Majority and Minority staff as I prepared this amendment on child marriage.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will designate the amendment.
 Page 59       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The CLERK. An amendment by Ms. McCollum of Minnesota. At the appropriate place in the bill support the following (and conform the table of contents accordingly): Section blank, Reports on Child Marriage——

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. The gentlelady is recognized for 5 minutes in support of her amendment.

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Ms. MCCOLLUM. My amendment will provide for a one-time State Department report on the practice of child marriage around the world. This report will provide a baseline study of the—excuse me—it will provide for a one-time State Department report on the practice of child marriage around the world.

    This report will provide a baseline study for the nature and extent of child marriage and countries where it is a common practice, which negatively impacts on the lives of girls. It will also inform us of actions being taken by governments to mitigate and minimize the harmful effects of girls entering into marriage.

    This one-time report, after it is concluded, on child marriage will then be included in future annual State Department human rights reports. Child marriage is labeled as a harmful traditional practice by UNICEF. This is a human rights issue, especially one that is coerced or involuntary or intergenerational; for example, when a 50-year-old man takes a third or a fourth wife who is a 14- or 15-year-old girl.
 Page 60       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Child marriage is a product of poverty and traditional customs. But regardless of the reason it is harmful to girls. Research shows that in developing nations child marriage is often associated with adverse economic and social consequences. It is dangerous to the health and well-being of girls.

    In developing countries where access to health care is limited, girls ages 10 to 14 years of age are 5 times more likely to die in pregnancy or childbirth than women ages 20 to 24.

    The health consequences for girls during pregnancy or childbirth include obstetric fistula, which is a devastating condition commonly associated with child marriage because of the immaturity of girl's bodies at the time of childbirth.

    Adolescent girls are more susceptible than mature women to sexually transmitted disease and infections. Research shows that married girls are at greater risk for HIV infection than their unmarried peers.

    A girl who enters into a child marriage is frequently denied further education and access to other health and economic and social activities.

    As the United States appropriately invests billions of dollars to improve lives around the world, child marriage undermines the efforts of developing countries and donor countries to promote economic and social development, and it undermines our investment to improve the health and education of girls and women.
 Page 61       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. Chair, it is important for the United States, as a Nation that values the lives and well-being of girls and women, to take a stand on child marriage.

    Many countries are moving to address child marriage. Although I will refer to Turkey in my closing remarks, I want to say that I think that this State Department report can be used to work to identify areas of improvement where we can work in partnership with countries that are moving to change away from this devastating practice toward young girls.

    The conclusion I would like to close with is a chilling example of why we need to reform this act. I am going to read an excerpt from a Los Angeles Times report. The story is entitled ''Where girls marry rapists for honor.''

    The story starts with Rojda. She was 13 when she was raped 2 years ago by a neighbor in this hardscrabble Kurdish province. In order to cleanse her honor, she was forced to marry her attacker in an unofficial Islamic-style ceremony. Later he was convicted of raping a 7-year-old boy, and he has been in prison.

    Rojda's troubles were far from over. According to the account of her ordeal provided by her family and attorneys, she allegedly was raped again in March by her father-in-law, who said that she should go into prostitution in order to earn her keep. When Rojda refused, the relatives and attorneys charged that a group of men held her down and sliced off her nose.

    Rojda's story is not unusual. Human rights groups and Turkish officials say violence against women is widespread in Turkey. Statistics are hard to come by, because so many attacks go unreported.
 Page 62       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    They blame the violence on poverty and lack of education and the structure of the patriarchal society that is prevalent in much of Turkish society.

    So, Mr. Chair, I would like to encourage my colleagues on this Committee to support this amendment.

    For the record, I would put in the full Los Angeles Times article, ''Where Girls Marry Rapists for Honor'' as well as a New York Times article, ''Turks Fight Honor Killings of Women'' as well as the UNICEF report on child marriage. I yield back.

    [The information referred to follows. NOTE: The UNICEF report entitled Early Marriage, A Harmful Traditional Practice is not reprinted here but is available in Committee records.]

Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times
All Rights Reserved
Los Angeles Times
May 24, 2005 Tuesday
Home Edition

SECTION: MAIN NEWS; Foreign Desk; Part A; Pg. 9

LENGTH: 898 words
 Page 63       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

HEADLINE: The World;
Where Girls Marry Rapists for Honor;
Turkey is working with agencies to combat widespread abuse of women. Education and tougher laws are part of the reform effort.

BYLINE: Amberin Zaman, Special to The Times

DATELINE: DIYARBAKIR, Turkey

BODY:

    Rojda was 13 when she was raped two years ago by a neighbor in this hardscrabble Kurdish province. In order to ''cleanse'' her honor, she was forced to marry her attacker in an unofficial Islamic-style ceremony. He later was convicted of raping a 7-year-old boy and has been imprisoned.

    But Rojda's troubles were far from over, according to an account of her ordeal provided by her family and attorneys. She allegedly was raped again in March by her father-in-law, who she said demanded she prostitute herself to earn her keep. When Rojda refused, the relatives and attorneys charge, a group of men held her down and sliced off her nose.

    Police raided their home after being tipped off by neighbors, who heard her cries. The men were briefly detained, then set free—though they have since been rearrested.
 Page 64       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Rojda's story is not unusual: Human rights groups and Turkish officials say violence against women is widespread in Turkey, though statistics are hard to come by because so many attacks go unreported. They blame the violence on poverty, a lack of education and the patriarchal structure prevalent in much of Turkish society.

    As this nation seeks to become the European Union's first predominantly Muslim member, its Islam-rooted government has teamed up with the EU and other international groups to combat abuses through a series of nationwide projects and campaigns.

    Their efforts are evident here in Diyarbakir, where the bar association is training local administrators to understand and implement new laws that, among other things, broaden women's rights and stiffen penalties for their abusers. The $500,000 project is being funded by the EU.

    ''We have trained 700 officials over the past year; awareness is growing,'' association President Sezgin Tanrikulu said last week. One such trainee learned of Rojda's plight soon after her alleged attackers were initially freed. He took her to Tanrikulu, complaining that justice had not been served.

    Rojda, a childlike figure with enormous dark eyes set above her disfigured nose, looked terrified, recalled Tanrikulu. ''We pressed fresh charges on her behalf, and the men were rearrested,'' he said.

    Her mother, Serife, who lives in a muddy tent on the outskirts of the nearby town of Cinar, said that Rojda ''was my prettiest girl'' before the attack. Serife, who carried a sickly child—her 10th—from a pouch strapped to her back, said she would ''not find peace'' until her daughter was avenged.
 Page 65       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Their attorneys requested that Serife and her daughter be identified only by their first names.

    If found guilty on separate counts of rape and assault, the men could face up to 22 years in prison, said Meral Bestas, an attorney at the bar association's women's advisory center, which is handling Rojda's case.

    Staffed by six female lawyers, the center offers free legal advice to women. Bestas said her clients are often illiterate and in polygamous and abusive marriages. Many are afraid to seek help.

    ''Their men view us as a subversive, corrupting influence and order them to stay away,'' Bestas said.

    Across from the center, in the Hasirli slum area, social worker Handan Coskun goes about empowering women in subtler ways. She supervises a free laundry service, which attracts hundreds of women and their children every week.

    The laundry doubles as a school where women are taught to read, write and use birth control. They are also informed of their legal rights.

    ''I felt stronger, safer after the courses,'' said Naile Gungor, a 49-year-old mother of seven, as she stuffed her wash into a machine.

 Page 66       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Like many here, she is a refugee from one of thousands of villages that were razed by Turkish security forces during a 15-year separatist insurgency led by rebels of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK. Government plans to repatriate the villagers have been marred by a resurgence in violence after the PKK—which has renamed itself the Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress, or KADEK—ended a five-year cease-fire last year.

    With dozens of refugees crammed into tiny concrete shacks in shantytowns that have sprung up across the southeast, ''abuse and incest have permeated people's genes,'' said Coskun, the social worker.

    Another big part of tackling violence against women involves educating men, said Meltem Agduk, a consultant with the United Nations Population Fund.

    The U.N. agency recently devised a program to discourage conscripts from engaging in domestic violence.

    With all Turkish men older than 18 required to perform 15 months of military service, the campaign should have far-reaching effects, Agduk predicted during an interview in Ankara, the Turkish capital.

    In a similar vein, the government last year instructed thousands of state-employed Muslim clerics to preach against ''honor killings,'' slayings committed by male relatives of women and girls accused of staining their family's reputation.

    Under Turkey's new penal code that will come into effect June 1, sentences for such crimes will be significantly increased. In the past, those convicted could get sentences reduced to as few as three years in prison because protecting the family's honor was seen as a mitigating circumstance. Now they will serve as much time as any other convicted murderer.
 Page 67       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Despite such efforts, the killings continue.

    This year in the province of Batman, east of Diyarbakir, an 18-year-old girl was shot to death by her brother for wearing blue jeans.

     

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
The New York Times
May 16, 2005 Monday
Early Edition

SECTION: Section A; Column 1; Foreign Desk; Pg. 13

LENGTH: 808 words

HEADLINE: Turks to Fight 'Honor Killings' of Women

BYLINE: By SEBNEM ARSU

DATELINE: ISTANBUL, May 15

BODY:

 Page 68       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    In a nondescript building in a remote part of Istanbul, a young woman sat in front of a television on a recent day watching a chilling scene unfold. Panning across the dank walls of a cave, the camera stopped on a primitive drawing of a female form, then dissolved into a modern crime scene showing the chalk outline of a woman's body on a road.

    ''Every year, dozens of women fall victim,'' said the menacing voice of Atilla Olgac, an actor who plays the most fearsome character on Turkey's most popular television drama. ''Don't be a part of this shame; don't turn a blind eye to murders committed in the name of honor.''

    The video is part of a nationwide campaign in Turkey to bring an end to so-called honor killings, in which a woman is killed by her husband or a male relative for behavior that is perceived as a slight to the dignity and respectability of her family. Rights organizations in Turkey and abroad have long denounced the practice as brutal and unfair to women; men who engage in the same activities are not held accountable.

    The 24-year-old woman was watching a preview of the television spot with officials from a women's shelter.

    She had been staying there for three days, the latest stop in a series of moves intended to keep her at a safe distance from a family that had decided she must return to her abusive husband, or die.

    Identified by shelter officials only as Nazan, she was married against her will when she was 15 and is now the mother of three children.
 Page 69       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Nazan said she fled her home after years of physical abuse and returned to her family declaring that she wanted a divorce. She begged to stay with her father for safety, but she said he considered her actions an affront to the family honor, and in an effort to force her back to her husband became abusive himself, leaving knife scars on her arms, legs and back.

    According to official records, 43 women in Turkey were victims of honor killings in 2004. But human rights activists say the number is far greater than that, with families reporting deaths as suicides or simply filing missing persons reports.

    ''Women's groups have been active in raising consciousness to prevent honor killings in the past few years but what they needed was a national campaign to support their work,'' said Nilufer Narli, a sociologist from Kadir Has University in Istanbul.

    She praised the campaign, which also includes billboards and fliers. ''Panels and conferences reach the elite, but you need television and movies to reach people in the street.''

    The promotional television spots are scheduled to be broadcast on donated time on at least 10 television stations and hundreds of radio stations nationally starting this week.

    Honor killings are most common in the country's rural southeast, and among poorer and less educated Turks.

 Page 70       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    In Diyarbakir, the largest city in the region, there are no shelters, despite efforts by local groups.

    ''Women are deeply hesitant to come to us,'' said Reyhan Yalcindag, deputy director of the Diyarbakir Human Rights Association. ''Even if they had the courage to file an official complaint, they still must go back to the home where they are targets, and live among the very people they have made charges against.''

    ''There are only 14 shelters in Turkey, and none in the southeast,'' she said. ''These are not acceptable figures.'' The media campaign in Turkey is the first combined effort on the issue of honor killings involving both governmental and nongovernmental organizations, as well as clerics, and it is being financed by a grant from the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

    At the same time Turkey, in hopes of being granted entry into the European Union, is working to bring its human rights standards in line with those of the West and to modernize its criminal justice system.

    A new penal code, ratified in September 2004, eliminated ''protection of family honor'' as a mitigating circumstance in murder trials and introduced heavier penalties for honor killing convictions. Another law recently passed by Parliament calls for the creation of a women's shelter in every large municipality in the country.

    But some critics say the changes are not enough. Despite the removal of the family honor provision, the commission making the legal changes left a loophole in the law, preserving ''unjust provocation'' as an available defense that could be invoked in honor killing cases.
 Page 71       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And while Ms. Yalcindag welcomed the potential addition of hundreds of new shelters, she said she was skeptical about the support they would get. ''Cities will be obliged to build more shelters, but it is the responsibility of the central government to ensure their security,'' she said, ''and there has been no promise made on that.''

    Mr. SMITH. I want to thank Ms. McCollum for working with us and developing a bipartisan text. I congratulate her on this amendment.

    Are there any other Members who would like to speak on this? If not, the question occurs on the amendment by the gentlelady from Minnesota, Ms. McCollum.

    All those in favor, signify by saving aye. Opposed, no.

    The ayes have it. The amendment is agreed to.

    It is my understanding that Mr. Sherman has some amendments he would like to offer.

    Mr. SHERMAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have quite a number of amendments at the desk and, at your suggestion, I would like unanimous consent to consider three of them en bloc. They would be the first, second and seventh amendments.

    The first deals with supporting pro-democracy organizations, notwithstanding section 620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act.
 Page 72       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The second sets forth the sense of Congress relating to nuclear proliferation and the A.Q. Khan network. I should point out that that second amendment is a redraft encompassing the suggestions and language put forward by my colleague from California, Ms. Lee.

    The third amendment deals with Palestinian textbooks. This third amendment is a sense of Congress that says—and these were matters that I brought directly to the attention of the Palestinian President just yesterday—that the United States would like to see first that they stop citing the infamous Elders of Zion forgery as a fact in their textbooks; second, that they recognize Israel and the Jewish people as among the nations of the world, among the peoples of the world and that they put Israel on a map of the Middle East.

    Now, it goes on to say that our continued support for the Palestinian Authority should, as a sense of Congress, be contingent upon these Palestinian textbooks being properly reformed.

    I would ask unanimous consent to put into the record here an extract from the new 10th-grade Palestinian history textbook.

    [The information referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. If the gentleman would suspend momentarily. So you are making a unanimous consent request that those three resolutions be considered en bloc?
 Page 73       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SHERMAN. Yes.

    Mr. SMITH. Is there any objection?

    Ms. LEE. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I object to one because I would like to discuss this with the Committee.

    Mr. SHERMAN. All right. There being an objection, I assume that relates to the seventh, Palestinian. Okay. I would ask unanimous consent that my first two amendments be considered en bloc.

    Mr. SMITH. Unanimous consent. The clerk will designate that before you go to debate if you would, first two amendments, first one dealing with pro-democracy and human rights organizations in certain countries and then the sense of Congress relating to nuclear proliferation and A.Q. Khan. Those are the two.

    Mr. SHERMAN. Okay. It is the second draft of that second amendment that encompasses Ms. Lee's suggestions.

    Mr. SMITH. So, the clerk, if you could designate those two.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Sherman. At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following new section——

 Page 74       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the reading of the amendments en bloc will be dispensed with.

    [The amendments en block referred to follow:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes in support of those two amendments en bloc.

    Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you. The first of these amendments deals with a problem I have mentioned before. That is that the legal adviser at the State Department has determined that section 620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act, which bans assistance to state sponsors of terrorism, can have the effect of banning assistance to pro-democracy groups in such countries as Iran and Syria.

    Now, we have for 1 year explicitly authorized aid to pro-democracy groups in Iran notwithstanding section 620(a), but this amendment looks toward the future and says that if we are going to promote democracy in countries that support terrorism we need to do so without being restricted by section 620(a).

    It is not a favor to the Iranian Government or the Syrian Government for us to support pro-democracy groups operating in those two countries, and this sweeps aside that technical legal problem.

 Page 75       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    The second amendment that is part of this en bloc points out that we should have access to A.Q. Khan and his top deputies and associates, that that of course need not be made public but at least behind the scenes we need an opportunity to interview and interrogate those who are part of this great and terrible network transferring nuclear technology to some of the most dangerous countries in the world.

    With that, I would like to reserve my time, if I am allowed to. Otherwise, I yield back.

    Mr. SMITH. Would anyone else like to be heard on the amendments en bloc?

    If not, the question occurs on the amendments en bloc offered by Mr. Sherman.

    All those in favor say aye. Those opposed no.

    The ayes have it, and the amendments en bloc are agreed to.

    Does the gentleman have some additional amendments?

    Mr. SHERMAN. Yes, if I can take just a moment to mention the amendments that I am going to offer and withdraw, I will do so.

    Mr. SMITH. Is the gentleman moving to strike the last word?
 Page 76       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SHERMAN. I am moving to strike the last word.

    Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is recognized.

    Mr. SHERMAN. I was going to offer, but will not, an amendment to deal with another legal glitch in providing democracy aid to groups in Iran and other countries that support terrorism. That legal glitch consists of our laws prohibiting the export of dual-use technology to anyone in or operating in those countries.

    My amendment—and I hope to be presenting this to the Full Committee or, better yet, working with Full Committee staff and Subcommittee staff to include it in the base bill—what my amendment is designed to do is to say that if there is technology that you or I or anyone in this room could go to Staples and buy, such as some Microsoft program, that we can also provide that to NGOs and other groups operating in these dictatorial countries.

    I also will later offer something on World Bank loans to Iran and the burden of State Department reports.

    Now let me move to amendment number 7, which I would ask the Clerk to designate. That deals with Palestinian textbooks.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will so designate.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Sherman of California. At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following new section——
 Page 77       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read.

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SMITH. The gentleman is recognized on his amendment for 5 minutes.

    Mr. SHERMAN. As I stated earlier, the purpose here is to advise—this is just a sense of Congress resolution. It is not actually binding on the State Department, that we should insist that Palestinian textbooks, the new textbooks being developed for use next year and the following year, are textbooks that teach peace.

    The thing that disturbs me most about a translation that I received of a 10th-grade history textbook is a statement that the conference that led to the Zionist movement that put forward the idea that Jews should move back to their ancestral home was actually a conference that created a plan for world domination, which is a canard and a forgery put forward by anti-Semites in Europe in the 1800s.

    So what this amendment would do is say we expect these textbooks to meet the standard that I have described, to not treat as fact the protocols of the Elders of Zion forgery—and that if we are going to aid the Palestinian Authority we expect them to have textbooks that meet these minimal pro-peace standards, or at least not incitement to violence standards.
 Page 78       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Now my colleague from California puts forward the argument, well, what if the Palestinian Authority did absolutely everything perfect but they still had in their textbooks the offending language?

    I would say that if we were trying to draft a statute that was mandatory on the State Department that that level of detailed concern would be appropriate and that I would want to work out very explicit language. But this is, after all, simply a sense of Congress resolution designed to demonstrate that we think the contents of these textbooks, which are under the control of the Palestinian Authority, are of importance to this Committee and importance to this Congress and that we expect the Palestinian Authority to, in its reform of these textbooks, actually reform them.

    I yield back.

    Mr. SMITH. The Chair recognizes Ms. Lee.

    Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a perfecting amendment at the desk.

    Mr. SMITH. The clerk will report, designate the perfecting amendment.

    The CLERK. Amendment to the amendment by Mr. Sherman offered by Ms. Lee. On my line 9, page 2, after support——
 Page 79       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. The gentlelady is recognized in favor of her perfecting amendment.

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Ms. LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me thank Mr. Sherman for this amendment and just say to him, as one who has experienced racism all of her life and sexism, I fully support exactly what you are saying and what you are doing with this amendment.

    In no way should the United States allow our money to support any type of textbook efforts that have any kind of anti-Semitism anywhere in these books or in educational materials.

    Let me say also I met with President Abbas yesterday. Of course he indicated that they are doing everything that they can do to stamp out, not only violence, but the culture of violence, and are committed to that, in addition to being committed to the roadmap and the peace process, which I am sure we all are also.

    This is a defining moment, I think, in the Middle East peace process in terms of Israel and the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people.

 Page 80       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    I believe that this resolution is a resolution that should move forward. But I would say to Mr. Sherman that I don't believe at this moment we should say we would withdraw our support, our total support for the Palestinian Authority if in fact the progress is not made in the textbook, rewriting of the textbooks and educational materials, because they are working on this. As you indicated in your resolution, the Palestinian Authority has undertaken this process.

    And so what my amendment does is just insert on line 9 where it says ''where we expressed the unwillingness of the United States to continue to support the Palestinian Authority,'' all I am saying is rather than this resolution saying we blanketly would withdraw support from the Palestinian Authority, we would say ''continue to support the reform of the textbooks in terms of our contribution.''

    That way it is a very important resolution, and I think it should be more than a sense of Congress resolution. I think this should be real, and I think that we should send a message, but I don't think we should just say we will withdraw support of the Palestinian community if we are attempting to make progress. We all agree that anti-Semitism and the promotion of violence and all of the things that we abhor are taking place.

    So I would ask Mr. Sherman to consider this, because I think this is a very reasonable and practical perfecting amendment.

    Mr. SHERMAN. I would like to meet—and if the gentlelady would yield, I think I could meet you halfway by saying we would insert the words ''continue to support educational programs of.'' I don't think that we should be supporting building schools and paying teachers for schools in which hatred is taught in the textbooks in those schools. So I think if we are going to support the educational programs of the Palestinian Authority, we should insist that those educational programs do not foster anti-Semitism and do not foster the rejection of peace.
 Page 81       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So rather than just saying that if the textbooks teach war we won't fund the textbooks, we say if the textbooks teach war we won't fund the educational programs.

    Mr. SMITH. Just a point of clarification with both of you. If Ms. Lee's language were to be accepted, it would read to express the unwillingness of the United States to support the textbooks. So the word ''unwillingness'' hangs out there as an unintended bit of language.

    While you are looking at that, I would just recognize myself for a moment to point out that, you know, Mr. Sherman, I appreciate you bringing this amendment to the floor. In a previous Congress, I and our distinguished Ranking Member of the Full Committee offered an amendment that would put us on record opposing the ongoing use of textbooks to promote anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli beliefs by the Palestinian Authority. So I think that continues this effort. So I think the general thrust of it is good.

    I think Ms. Lee makes a good point. We do support the Palestinian Authority. We think that it is a viable government entity. We want them to be on the side of reform, and aggressive reform at that, when it comes to anti-Semitism and hate that is often contained inside the covers of these textbooks.

    Mr. Payne.

    Mr. PAYNE. Yes, I, too, think that anti-Semitism, which is in textbooks, is not the way to go. I think the truth is the light and I will support the amendment. However, I think that the timing is absolutely, totally wrong, even though I will support Ms. Lee's amendment.
 Page 82       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I think that when we have—totally opposed to textbooks that are as characterized by Mr. Sherman. They certainly have no place, especially no place since the U.S. is supporting this.

    However, when we have a new leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas has said not only is he against violence, that he says it goes even deeper. He said he is against the cultural violence, which is the first time that anyone has ever said the cultural violence. He is having a struggle for his own life because I would not be surprised if the militants have plans to try to assassinate him, because he is certainly going against some of the very radical militants.

    As a person who is so doing—he said 90 percent of terror, there has been a 90 percent of reduction in the area of his authority and he is going for the rest. I think this is an important issue. But as we find someone who is not only against violence, but the culture of violence, then to bring this up at this time, I think, to me it is important. I think it would be something that I would prefer to see State Department and our officials discuss with them and have some standards.

    Like I said, I will support it, because if I didn't I would be considered anti-Semitic. So I don't need to go through that every year. I just think the timing is bad. I could not agree more with it. I think that when we find someone who is really attempting to come up—because there has got to be a solution to the problem in the Middle East. This is about the best thing that we have got compared to the rest in 25 years. I think that he would want—if he is going to fight against violence and the cultural violence, I would be sure that he would want to see these textbooks changed because that is not what is going to change the cultural violence.
 Page 83       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So I just think that, like I said, I certainly will go along with it. I just think that, like I said, once we find someone who is trying to go against those radical militant murderers, his life is in jeopardy every day, not that this puts him in more jeopardy, but I think we need to show a little more support for what he is attempting to do.

    We just had a bill passed in the State legislature in New Jersey. My brother—the Amistad bill, you know what it is, that New Jersey can no longer have discrimination in history. The Amistad legislation. You frown. What I mean by that is—that is all right. You didn't say anything.

    What I mean by that is that we hear about, you know, Patrick Henry, but not about Chris Satter, who was the first person to die in the Civil War. We hear about Admiral Byrd, but we don't hear about Matthew Henson who really discovered the North Pole. We don't hear about the Buffalo Soldiers, Battle of San Juan Hill, President Roosevelt to be saved by the Buffalo Soldiers totally excluded. We don't hear about my uncle who was in the invasion of Normandy because they didn't give any African-Americans letters because they said they didn't exist in the invasion of Normandy.

    So I, one who has lived as a history teacher, the textbooks of Muzzy, that were taught—and everybody my age or below had Muzzy. That was the one history book used all over the United States—and excluded the Tuskegee Airmen that never lost a plane. On and on and on.

    So I am simply saying this is something that is very passionate to me because I have seen the exclusion of—we saw Sergeant York as a kid in World War I. There was a guy, Private Johnson, who held 30 Germans, kept them a month by himself, he and a fellow from New Jersey that did it alone.
 Page 84       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So you are talking about exclusion. This is really passionate with me. Like I said, I think your concept is right, but I think that when we finally got someone, I would hope that we can support the new head of the Palestinian Authority because this Middle East situation has to end. Like I said, I just think that the timing—well, it is a sense of Congress, so I probably did enough damage already.

    Well, I yield back to Ms. Lee.

    Mr. SMITH. Ms. Lee, I understand you have a perfected text.

    Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, yes. I ask unanimous consent to modify my amendment to read on page 2, line 9, we insert ''educational programs of,'' that is after ''support.''

    Mr. SMITH. Is there objection? No objection. I understand, Mr. Royce, you wanted to speak to the issue? The Chair recognizes Mr. Royce.

    Mr. ROYCE. No, Mr. Chairman. I am going to speak to the prior issue. So when you have dispensed with this, I am happy to be recognized.

    Thank you.

    Mr. SMITH. Mr. Sherman.

 Page 85       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC
    Mr. SHERMAN. Yes, I would just like to say with Ms. Lee modifying her amendment, that amendment is acceptable to me. I would like unanimous consent that my amendment contain the three words that she suggested.

    Mr. SMITH. Sure, okay. The vote then occurs on the Lee amendment.

    All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed, no.

    The ayes have it. The amendment, as perfected by the Lee amendment, is agreed to.

    Now the vote occurs on the Sherman amendment, as amended. The vote occurs on the Sherman amendment.

    All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Opposed, no.

    The ayes have it. As perfected by the Lee amendment, it is agreed to.

    My understanding—the Chair recognizes Mr. Royce.

    Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do seek recognition. This concerns Mr. Sherman's amendment on the A.Q. Khan network. While I support the thrust of the amendment, I would like to go on record expressing possible reservations about specific provisions. The amendment deals with an issue clearly within the Subcommittee that I chair, with Mr. Sherman as the Ranking Member on that Committee. I didn't see this amendment until just now.
 Page 86       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    At Full Committee we will review this. I may offer amendments at Full Committee level. But my issue here is about process, and I just wanted to raise it.

    I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Chairman Royce. Are there any further amendments?

    Mr. Sherman.

    Mr. SHERMAN. Yes, I have one final amendment at the desk.

    Mr. SMITH. Clerk will designate the amendment.

    The CLERK. I am not sure which one it is.

    Mr. SHERMAN. This is positions at State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development.

    The CLERK. Amendment offered by Mr. Sherman: At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following——

    Mr. SMITH. Mr. Sherman, if you could dispense with the reading, you were going to waive?
 Page 87       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [The amendment referred to follows:]

[Note: Image(s) not available in this format. See PDF file]

    Mr. SHERMAN. Yes. Let me simply say that I look forward to working with the State Department to improve this. I look forward to working with Mr. Royce on the Pakistan language. I withdraw this amendment.

    Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. Are there any further amendments?

    If not, the question occurs on the amendment. All in favor of the motion to report the legislation to the Full Committee, all those in favor say aye. Those opposed.

    The ayes have it and the legislation is agreed to.

    The question occurs. Without objection, the bill will be reported favorably to the Full Committee in the form of a single amendment in the nature of a substitute incorporating the amendments offered here today.

    Without objection, the staff is directed to make technical and conforming amendments to it.

    I want to thank all of my colleagues for being here today and for your very active participation.
 Page 88       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We are adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]