side. with respect to h.r. 1886 regarding pakistan, i do not need to remind my colleagues of the challenge to u.s. national security posed by the situation in that country. we cannot allow al qaeda and any other terrorist group that threatens our national security interest to operate with impunity in the tribal regions or any other part of pakistan. . nor can we let the pakistani state and its nuclear arsenal to be taken over by the taliban. h.r. 1886 was designed to address these threats by supporting democracy, enhancing u.s. economic assistance and providing the pakistani military with the tools they need to fight the terrorists. i am pleased we could work out a consensus on this important bill with our colleagues on the committee on armed services as

reflected in the amendment made in order by the rule. and i'm also pleased that the rule makes in order a republican substitute. that way we can discuss the best way forward to get the results we need in this ongoing effort those that threaten our allies and even our homeland. i encourage all my colleagues to support the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield -- i yield five minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new jersey -- i'm sorry. i'm sorry. mr. royce wanted two minutes earlier. is mr. royce here? five minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for five minutes. mr. smith: i thank my good friend for yielding. i rise in opposition to the rule.

let me just say at the outset, mr. speaker, in the 1990's i served as chairman of the international operations and human rights subcommittee. at first having served as rankg member under tom lantos. then when the house went republican we switched and i became the chairman of that committee. one of the responsibilities of that committee was to write the foreign relations act, the state department re-authorization act for the country. and we worked very hard, mr. lantos and i, very diligently in crafting a bill that was, a, truly bipartisan and, b, open to virtually every amendment that members wanted to offer. i remember bringing a bill to the floor, mr. speaker, that allowed every day members just had to file their amendments in the congressional record a preprinting requirement so in the morning we'd wake up and find out what amendments might be offered and then we would deal dispatch positively or negatively with those amendments.

it was open. today we have a very much closed rule. not on things where there's consensus. sure, there's some republican amendments, but on areas where there is significant and fundamental disagreement, especially an amendment that i had hoped to offer, i had been precluded that right. i want to say to my colleagues, i didn't do that when i chaired the subcommittee. and i worked very hard in a bipartisan way with my friends and i do consider you on the other side of the aisle friends to ensure that we all got our voice, we all had an opportunity to express ourselves. in committee i offered and amendment to establish a global office on women's issues. it lost on a party line vote. every democrat voted against it. every republican voted for it. that legislation would have established a new office for global women's issues led by an ambassador at-large, designed and coordinate on activities, policies and program related to women's empowerment

internationally. the amendment would promote educational opportunities and job training for women, equal pay for equal work, microfinancing and microenterprise programs for women, property rights for women. improvement of maternal mortality, combat forced abortions and forced sterilization, to enhance our efforts in the area of sex and labor trafficking, particularly of women. and other forms of violence against women, end sexual mutilation and change of male attitudes and behavior that are detrimental to women. that was all prescribed in the legislation, and obviously other things could be included as well. consistent with core human rights norms that all human life, mr. speaker, is sacred and precious and worthy of

protection, regardless of age, sex, race, color, creed, disability, wantedness or condition of dependency. my amendment sought to hold harmless unborn children and their mothers from the violence of abortion. the amendment is abortion neutral and states that the new office shall not engage in activities to offer the laws or policies of foreign countries with regards to how abortion is regulated or permitted. abortion neutral. i'd like it to be a pro-life office that says let's empower and embrace and enfranchise unborn children. i say to my colleagues, we live in twin. we no -- 2001. we no longer have any -- we live in 2009. unborn children are just like you and i except they're young. they're immature and they're dependent. and their human rights are violated with impunity, not just in this country, but around the world, and sadly the

obama administration, and i say this with great sadness, mr. obama is on his way of becoming the abortion president. virtually everything he's done through executive order and through appointments and through other policies promote the killing of unborn children and the wounding of their mothers. so i rise in opposition to this amendment, mr. speaker -- to this rule. whether this body wanted to vote up or down on my amendment we should have had the opportunity. and i find it sadens me greatly because -- sadens me greatly because i have worked very closely with the staff on human rights issue. this is a human rights issue. there could be a consensus about the new office that's already been created and it gives statutory affirmation to women's issues but unfortunately we will not have that opportunity. i would remind my colleagues that dr. martin luther king's

niece -- can i have an abigsal minute? diaz-balart 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. smith: dr. martin luther king's niece has had two abortions. she now heads up an organization called the silent no more awareness campaign. and she speaks out and says that this is the new civil rights movement, protecting the unborn child. but equally protecting women from abortion. it is violence against women, it is violence against children. the new global office on women's issues ought to at least be neutral, i would say, affirm the unborn but at least neutral when it comes to respecting unborn human life. i thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey's time has expired. the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield three

minutes to the distinguished gentleman from colorado, my colleague and a good friend of the committee on rules, mr. polis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for three minutes. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise in support of the rule and h.r. 2410, the foreign relations authorization act for 2010 and 2011. i'd like to thank chairman berman and the house foreign affairs committee for their continued insight, leadership and their focus on diplomacy in the realm of foreign affairs and for bringing this much-needed reform legislation to the house floor. mr. speaker, during the bush administration the department of defense acted as our primary foreign liaison much to the detriment of our relationships worldwide. this bill corrects the damage done over the past eight years by providing the state department with much-needed resources that will once again make diplomacy the center place of our outreach effort. this bill authorizes funding for the state department and usaid to help prevent, navigate and peacefully resolve foreign crisisies. this bill strengthens our own nation to show the hardworking

nation. it reflects our commitment to intellectual diplomacy and allows the united states to lead by example. for instance, by doubling the amount of volunteers in the peace corps we can double our response to humanitarian and international development needs. by creating the senator paul simon study abroad foundation we would allow more students, regardless of their economic background, to experience foreign cultures. this ligs creates 1,500 -- this legislation creates 1,500 state department jobs and also at usaid. it funds language training programs, sorely neglected for years due to underfunding. as a representative of the second district of colorado, we have a large tibetan and tibetan buddhist community. and i'm particularly appreciative that this bill establishes a tibet section in the u.s. consulate in lawsa, tibet. it will follow political and social developments inside the country and report on human rights.

it also establishes a tibetan scholarship program that will enhance cultural exchanges possibilities for students and develop an increased understanding of the area as a whole. and fight against the discrimination of the ltgb community worldwide, including in iraq. it will require the state department to monitor and track violence, criminalization and restriction on basic human rights consistent with u.s. law. it requires the state department to demand foreign governments to change or appeal discriminatory laws that criminalize homosexuality as well as requiring reports on related violence and discrimination. this will ensure that our foreign counterparts heed our rejection of intolerance and ensure that all people are granted the dignity they deserve. mr. speaker, i also applaud h.r. 1886, the pakistani counterinsurgency capability fund or peace act. it demonstrates our commitment to foreign diplomacy and codifies the principle that social and economic development is critical to fighting terrorism and promoting peace.

both bills bring to mind the idea that might is not right. military intervention is not a strong a diplomatic tool as fostering understanding. i urge my colleagues to support and vote yes on the rule and the bill. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado's time has expired. the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california, mr. royce. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. roistroist i thank the gentleman. i -- mr. royce: i thank the gentleman. thank you, mr. speaker. pakistan is the at a very critical juncture, colleagues. we have radical madrasses that are graduating at an ever increasing number of jihadists out of those schools. and we have a weak government with nuclear weapons. this pakistan bill is a good attempt to guide our engagement in pakistan in a way that gives us the best chance to see that our aid is spent in a constructive and responsible

fashion which hasn't been the case. i commend its author, chairman berman. as to the rule, i think it is problematic. the state department authorization bill quite simply spends money we don't have, over a third increase at the time when we're borrowing money from china and elsewhere. amendments to cut this amount were not made in order. i think that was a mistake. i am very disappointed, let me add, though, at the addition done by the rules committee of a flawed trade provision. don't get me wrong. trade can do far, far more than aid for pakistan's economic development and social stability, which is in our interest. the problem is that this provision is far too restrictive and burdensome as to do any good. in fact, it may be harmful to trade. at a time when pakistan is perhaps the greatest threat facing us, this is no time for window dressing and business as usual. this preferencial trade

provision as it -- this prembings trade provision is -- this preferential trade provision is unacceptable. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the distinguished chairman of the foreign affairs committee, mr. berman. california is recognized for three minutes. mr. berman: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and, again, to my friend from florida for yielding me some additional time. i'd like to use this time to deal with one of the points made by friend from florida, mr. diaz-balart, and more substantially to the issue raised by the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith. mr. diaz-balart cited a letter signed by the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the secretary of defense that was sent a number of weeks ago long before a series of changes were made in this bill.

at the time that letter was sent we had a very elaborate resolution of disapproval process for the presidential determinations. that has been struck. we had a very high waiver standard vital to national security interests. that has been struck. we had a great dispute that was existing over how the pakistan counterinsurgency cooperation fund should work. those issues have all been worked out with the house armed services committee. the house armed services committee has worked through all of these issues with us. they are reflected in the pakistan bill. this is the committee to whom the secretary's letter was addressed. a number of changes have been made. my friend's comments relate more to the pentagon's view of this bill before all those changes were made than they do now.

but the issue i would really like to focus is the issues raised by the gentleman from new jersey. this is a statement department authorization bill. the first thing i did as we put this bill together was to say we are not going to use this piece of legislation to change the substantive law on the issue that is so controversial for which agreement -- which disagreements are so strong in this house. this is not going to be a vehicle for changing the law on that subject. . when a number of the groups came with a compelling chase, the pro-choice groups, that we should include a provision in the bill that prohibits any president in the future from imposing an executive order such as the mexico city policies, i said i would love to. i support that position. but we are not going to use this bill to do it.

the gentleman from new jersey, he's not truly at his heart driving at the office of global warming's issues. this is an office in one form or another has been around since 1975. their purpose is promote education for women and girls around the world, political empowerment like the right to vote for women, to deal with problems of violence against women. there is no basis for assuming this office is going to do anything to promote or lobby for abortion. i would ask unanimous consent for two additional minutes. mr. hastings: i yield an additional two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two additional minutes. mr. berman: but moreover, in the manager's amendment which is made in order by this rule that we are now debating, i said, let us establish in policy our statement of neutrality on this issue. and we include in the manager's amount a provision which says, nothing in this section and in particular the duties of the

office of global women's issues, shall be construed as affecting in any way existing statutory prohibitions against abortion. no change whatsoever in existing statutory prohibitions against abortion, or existing statutory prohibitions on the use of funds to engage in any activity or effort to alter the laws or policies and effect in any foreign country concerning the circumstances under which abortion is permitted, regulated, or prohibited. that means the helms amendment, the leahy amendment which construct the current state of the law with respect to u.s. efforts on this issue abroad remain in effect and unchaed and there's nothing in the statutory institutionization of

an already existing office on global woman's issues that would change that and we affirm that by this statute. what the gentleman from new jersey wants to do, he didn't quite say it, but he acknowledges it when asked about it, he wants to change the law. that's legitimate. he can have his efforts. but for those of us who say let's not use this as a vehicle one way or the other. for those of us who have rejected efforts that we personally support, which i'm very much committed to, from the pro-choice community regarding this issue, there's no basis for saying that this bill is defective because it doesn't serve either side's agenda on this particular issue. with that i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california's time has expired. the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from indiana, mr. burton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is

recognized for three minutes. mr. burton: i thank my colleague for yielding. i had three amendments that was brought before the rules committee yesterday and i can't for the life of me figure out why in the world the rules committee didn't make these bills in order. let me just talk to you about these three amendments. i would like for the rules committee to comment on them if they would. first of all there is a man who has been indicted in the oil for food scandal with saddam hussein. saddam hussein was kicking millions of dollars to this guy in the oil-for-food scandal, this guy's been indicted. he's hiding in cyprus right now, and the u.n. with our money is going to pay his legal bills and they are almost $1 millioner already. why should the american taxpayers be paying the legal bills of mr. savagn that was involved in the oil-for-food scandal that we know about? why should the american taxpayer be paying his legal fees? that was one of his amendments.

i hope you'll explain why the american taxpayers should pay for that. the second amendment is -- deals with liquid -- liquidated assets we give to enterprise organizations around the world. we give hundreds of millions of dollars to organizations around the world to help the economies of various countries. and when those enterprise funds are -- and organizations are liquidated, they take that money and they put it into foundations or other organizations within those countries. and right now there's $900 million that's sitting out there of american taxpayers' money that's going to foundations and other countries and we don't believe all that money should go there because it's not for its intended purpose. so if they want to do that, we think we should get at least half of our money back which would be $450 million. i can't for the life of me figure out why the rules committee wouldn't want to get at least half of our money back that's not used for its intended

purpose. it makes no sense to me. and lastly jerusalem and israel is our best ally in the middle east. since the 1967 war, israel has maintained that -- a united jerusalem is indivisible in the eternal capital of israel. and in -- november 14 of 2005, congress mandated that the embassy be moved to jerusalem. we mandated our embassy be moved from tel aviv to jerusalem in 2005. we did give the president waiver authority under certain circumstances. every single year there's been a waiver granted that does not allow our embassy to be moved to jerusalem. i think that's wrong. it's time to change that. my amendment would have said that we move our embassy and start bidding the embassy in jerusalem now just as it was proposed and passed by this congress in 2005. so i'd like for my colleagues on

the rules committee, on the democrat side, to explain to me why these three amendments were not made in order. one dealing with something we have already done and that was to order our embassy to be moved to -- in israel to jerusalem. we have already ordered that. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana's time has expired. mr. burton: i hope you'll explain. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. mr. hastings: i'm very pleased to yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from florida, my colleague and fellow floridian, mr. klein. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. klein: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the congressman. i rise to support the rule and underlying legislation, foreign relations authorization act of 2009. this bill will allow us to advance our foreign policy and national security goals and i believe very strongly in that goal. i would also like to briefly speak about one provision in the bill that will help ensure the safety of many americans. as many of us know, june 1 is the beginning of hurricane season and there are many ways to be prepared.

hurricane hunter planes used by the air force fly into hurricane areas to more accurately predict where a hurricane is going. however certain countries are not allowing these planes to fly into their airspace. if one country obstructs our hurricane preparedness efforts, it can be the difference between life and death. this legislation puts in place measures so the state department can resolve this issue as soon as possible and help protect our americans. i'd like to thank the chairman for allowing us to work on this issue and all the others with me and others, and i urge my colleagues to support the rule and underlying legislation and yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: with regard to the point made by the distinguished chairman of the strange on the military aid to pakistan, i hope and expect that will be engaged in the debate with the ranking member who very clearly in the rules committee

pointed out that the strings are still excessive. i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. lee: i thank the gentleman from floridaer for yielding. i rise to oppose the rule and underlying bill. the legislation we are set to consider today is the latest demonstration of washington's failure to understand how the middle class lives in these difficult economic times. try, for instance, to explain the logic in a 23% increase to overseas foreign service officers to workers in my district who are either taking pay cuts or losing benefits. or ask the families in my district who are doing their best to make ends meet when washington spends money it does not have to fund these salary increases. it's not just the disconnect on spending that's cause for concern. in the last month alone gas prices in my district have been up over 41 cents. these are resources coming out of individuals who are struggling in my district to

make ends meet. now democratic leaders are pushing for an ambitious national cap and trade tax. this tax will cost between $200 and $300 a month for struggling families on a new energy tax. this affects not only families but small businesses, ranchers, farmers, i can't think of a worse way to deal with our pressing energy needs than a tax situation. we need to be looking at an all-of-the-above strategy be it nuclear power, wind, solar but not looking at trying to tax right now that will push businesses further away and a loss of jobs in our communities. whether it's the excessive spending in the measure we are considering today or this new national energy tax, washington continues to grow more and more out of touch with middle class america and families in my district. i urge my colleagues to vote down the rule and oppose the

underlying bill. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, how much time do we have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has 6 1/2 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from florida has 7 seven minutes remaining. mr. hastings: i would inquire of my friend if he has any additional speakers? mr. diaz-balart: yes. mr. hastings: i would reserve at this time and allow that you go forward. mr. diaz-balart: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves the balance of his time. mr. diaz-balart: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith, is recognized for two minutes. mr. smith: i thank my good friend for yielding. i just want to say to my pro-life friends on the democrat side of the aisle, think consequences. in april, late april, i asked secretary of state hillary clinton at one of our hearings if -- this is the question i

posed to her, is the obama administration seeking in any way to weaken or overturn pro-life laws and policies in african nations and latin american countries either directly through multilateral organizations, including the united nations, african union, or the organization for american states, or by way of funding n.g.o.'s like planned parenthood? secretary of state clinton answered that the administration was, quote, entitled to advocate abortion anywhere in the world. she also went on to redefine the words, reproducte health, which are found in many documents and many laws around the world, completely contrary to the accepted definition by the previous administration and many others to include abortion. every time you see that word now in a document, to the clintons and owe bombas it means abortion on demand. the global office on women's issues ought to be all about promoting human rights for women

. promoting violence against children and the wounding of their mothers is not human rights. it is the contrary, exbe act opposite. i hope my colleagues will realize that the amount that my good friend and colleague the chairman of the committee, mr. berman, is offering simply restates current law. it says they will follow the law. did anybody not expect that the office would follow the law? of course they would. hopefully they would. we need to make sure or ensure that this new office which will be a command and control center as it ought to be not become an office for naral and planned parenthood and others in the promotion of child deaths around the world. let's hold harmless the precious lives of unborn children. let's mitigate maternal mortality and all the other crises affecting women, not the killing of unborn babies. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey's time has expired. the gentleman from florida

reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished the gentlewoman from new york, my good friend, ms. clarke. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for two minutes. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank you, my colleague, the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings. i rise in strong support of h.r. 2110, the foreign affairs authorization act. this authorization includes provisions that keep our country safe, advance human rights, and promotes gender equality across the globe. in the 111th congress i introduced -- 110th congress i introduced h.res. 554, linking drug trafficking to rising crime rates in caribbean nations. the measure calls for increased cooperation between the u.s. and caribbean officials to combat drug trafficking and promote counterterrorism. karacome, made up of 15 countries, including trinidad