offer a lifeline to republicans. let's work together to pass a bill before the president faced with no other choice takes action himself. you have 34 legislative days left until july 4. you better make good use of them. the american people are waiting. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. bilirakis, for five minutes. mr. bilirakis: i rise in support of autism awareness month. april is autism awareness month, and today is april 2, autism awareness day. autism is serious, mr. speaker. it does not discriminate. people in all racial, social economic -- socioeconomic and ethnic groups are impacted. one in 68 children are diagnosed with autism. let me say it again. one in 68 children. it this is a very disturbing

statistic. mr. speaker, florida has a lot of great programs and resources for individuals with autism. the centers for autism and related disabilities, or cards, all across the state of florida, will be offering resources and awareness month activities. the partnership for effective programs for students with autism pairs teachers and students to assist students with autism. this program's motto is to provide quality educational programs to students with autism spectrum disorders. it is through the graciousness and generosity of organizations like these and the individuals involved with them that help in the fight against autism. it is important to raise awareness. it is important to provide programs to assist children and adults with disorders on the autism spectrum.

ultimately, through groups like this and through public and private partnerships, we can continue to work towards a cure. i'm committed to this cause, and i encourage my fellow members on both sides of the aisle to get involved. this is an issue that truly overcomes partisan lines. the light it up blue campaign draws awareness for autism as well. to date, thousands of businesses and landmarking will be lit blue. together we can shine the light on autism. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. deutch, for five minutes. mr. deutch: i thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize mr. anthony p. "tony" riordan, deputy for the secretary of the

air force. a command navigator from west palm beach, florida, with 1,700 -4-c, hours in the rf director of named strategy and resources integration for the deputy undersecretary of the air force international affairs. this recent promotion is no surprise to anyone who knows tony. throughout his life, he has displayed exceptional leadership and judgment. he graduated in 1977 from forest hill high school in west palm beach and then he was known for his intelligence, his loyalty and his integrity. he was a drummer in the marching band, a pitcher for the baseball and participant in the american legion boys state program which encourages people to grow and engage into responsible citizens. after graduating from florida state university in 1981, tony was selected to attend undergraduate navigator training in california.

he quickly gathered -- he 12th guarded the tactical squadron at the air force base. he was needed in the front line during the cold war and was assigned in germany. following the end of the cold war, he continued to pass his wealth of knowledge and experience onto the next generation of weapons systems officers. realizing his talent for leadership, his commander sent him to langley air force base in virginia where he excelled as directate. he was sent overseas this time at camp red cloud, korea. later he was assigned to pacific aforce headquarters, returning to plans director in hawaii. after three years in hawaii, he began numerous assignments as headquarters air force in the pentagon. as deputy director of

legislative liaison for the air force, he engaged congress on programs and weapons systems authorizations, constituent inquiries and other congressional interests. among some of his more notable accomplishments during his tenure as deputy director, tony prepared the air force team for confirmation hearings for the secretary, undersecretary, chief of staff and the vice chief of staff, all in an unprecedented two-year time frame. he also supported more than 1,500 air force senior leader visits as well as over 100 wing commander hell visits. more than 450 congressional delegation and congressional staff trips, over 200 congressional hearings and countless other air force hill engagements. today, i'd like to wish mr. anthony p. "tony" riordan, god peed and good luck for his new position. we know that this next chapter

of his distinguished career will be one of even more success. on behalf of the congress and the united states of america, i thank tony, his wife, dee, and their children, maggie and tripp, for their patriotism, commitment to country and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from puerto rico, mr. pierluisi, for five minutes. mr. pierluisi: mr. speaker, this week, g.a.o. published a report about the fiscal impact of puerto rico statehood on the federal government. in a 2012 referendum, a majority of voters in puerto rico said they don't want puerto rico to remain a territory, and more voters favored statehood than any other option. in january at my initiative, there was funding for the first federally sponsored vote in puerto rico's history. meanwhile, in the past year,

puerto rico's long-standing economic problems has devolved into a crisis. 1,000 go to the united states in search for opportunity and quality. thus, g.a.o. has released its report at a time when island residents are voting for statehood at the ballot box and with their feet in unprecedented numbers. the momentum in favor of statehood continues to build with this report which supports the conclusion that statehood will be beneficial to puerto rico and the u.s. as a whole. the report confirms that statehood will enhance quality of life in puerto rico. as a territory, puerto rico is treated unequally under key federal spending and tax credit programs. as a state, it will receive equal treatment. based on g.a.o.'s analysis and taken into account programs g.a.o. did not examine, it can be calculated that statehood

will eninject additional $10 billion into puerto rico's economy each year. this underscores the cope and severity of the discrimination puerto rico faces as a territory. the report also alleviates concern that statehood would have an adverse impact on the u.s. treasury. as g.a.o. explains, new federal outlays to puerto rico will be significantly counterbalanced by new federal revenue generated from the island which could account to $7 billion a year. as puerto rico prospers, collections will increase further. the report thus reinforces that statehood, which is so in puerto rico's interest is also in the national interest. this nation will benefit when puerto rico's economy is strong, its residents don't need to move to the states but keep their dreams, vote for their national leaders.

individuals and businesses on the island flourish and the tax base expands. the u.s. will profit from the state of puerto rico's success, just as it currently pays in economic and moral price for the territory's shortcomings. the reaction to the report from politicians in puerto rico who favor the status quo has been dishonest. their strategy is clear. if you cannot convince the public, try to confuse the public. for example, they claim the report concludes that hardworking island residents would have a large federal tax liability on their statehood. the report says no such thing, and the assertion is false. a typical household in puerto rico will pay the same or less in total taxes on their statehood than it pays now. due to the application of federal tax credits and the ability of the puerto rico government to reduce its high local rates once it no longer needs to finance a

disproportionate share of public services. in any event, this inaccurate argument shows disrespect for the people of puerto rico who will be proud to assume both the rights and responsibilities of statehood. throughout history, men and women have fought and fallen for equality and dignity. these principles are priceless. my colleagues who requested the g.a.o. report should now schedule a hearing on it. 75 days have passed since enactment of the law authorizing puerto rico to hold a federally sponsored referendum. 132 members of congress have sponsored my legislation that calls for a referendum on puerto rico's admission as a state and that requires federal action if a majority of voters choose statehood. if the governor of puerto rico believes this claim that the g.a.o. report is somehow damaging to statehood, he should have the courage of his convictions and conduct a statehood admission vote with the available federal funds

without delay. his inaction speaks louder than his words. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.

real growth since the 2010, 2011 biennium. freezing pay, cutting waste, increasing transparency, and strengthening oversight of peacekeeping operations. much more needs to be done and much more can be done. with your support we'll continue our work to make the u.n. more effective, efficient, transparent, and accountable. third, we are fighting every day

on numerous fronts to end the bias against israel that has long pervaded the u.n. system. with our help israel has in recent months become a full member of two groups from which they will long be excluded, the western european and others group in geneva, and a human rights caucus in new york. these groups are where much of the behind the scenes coordination takes place for u.n. meet, leadership assignments, and votes, and the united states and israel have tried for years to break down the barriers blocking israel's entry into both groups. these milestones would perhaps seem less consequential if they had not been so unjustifiably delayed. slowly but surely we are chippingway at obstacles and biases. israel's inclusion sends a powerful message to those striving to isolate the jewish state, and that message is you will not succeed. the united states will stand with israel. we will defend it, and we will challenge every instance of unfair treatment throughout the

u.n. system. the united states -- let me also add given reports yesterday of new palestinian action that is both of you have referenced this commitment extends to our firm opposition to any and all unilateral actions in the international arena, including on palestinian statehood, that circumvent or prejudge the outcomes that can only come about through a negotiated settlement. again i would like to come back to this troubling issue in the discussion period if i could. fourth, i ask the subcommittee's full support for u.n. peace operations. from haiti to lebanon to sub-saharan africa our country has a deep and abiding interest in restoring stability, mitigating conflict, and combating terrorism. multilateral peace operations enable us to do so in a cost-effective manner in such strife torn countries as south sudan, somalia, d.r.c., swell transitioning countries critical to u.s. interests such as afghanistan, libya, and iraq.

since the president submitted his budget on march 4, owing to a sharply deteriorating security environment in the central african republic, secretary-general moon has recommended the rapid employment of a new u.n. mission to protect civilians. the emergency in the central african republic and our view that a peacekeeping mission is required because of the acute security needs, highlights the value of a peacekeeping response mechanism of the type we have proposed to deal with contingencies arising outside of the regular budget cycle. at the same time, the real world is presenting catastrophic humanitarian emergencies like this one to which it is in the u.s. national interest to respond. we are rigorously reviewing all u.n. missions and urging the u.n. to do so as well. we know the importance of reducing our closing missions where conditions on the ground permit and when host governments have the capability and must find the will to manage their own affairs, particularly after a year-long deployments by the

united nations. in our view peacekeeping activities are often essential, but they need not be eternal. finally, we are striving to mobilize the u.n. as a vehicle for the promotion of human dignity and human rights. and a form in which the united states can continue to stand up to repressive regimes. with the strong backing of many in congress, including all of you here today, we have exposed russian duplicity in ukraine, fought back against the global crackdown on civil society, provide add flat form the victims of oppression in north korea, cuba, iran, syria, venezuela, and elsewhere, and pursued such vital objectives as universal access to education and end to gender-based violence, support for religious liberty, and defeat of hiv-aids. madam chairwoman, for almost 70 years american leaders have found it in our interest to participate act actively in the united nations and other international organizations. in this era of seemingly nonstop

turbulence, diverse threats, and border shrinking technologies, we can accrue significant benefit from an institution that seeks every day to prevent conflict, promote development, and protect human rights. for these reasons i again urge your favorable consideration of our 2015 budget request. to close on a personal note, i consider it both enormous honor and a great responsibility to sit behind america's placard at the u.n. and a bringing part of that privilege and responsibility is the chance to work closely with you as the guardians of america's purse and representatives of the american people. to ensure that our national interests are well served. i will be pleased to answer any questions you may have, including some you have already posed. thank you. >> thank you so much. hank you for that. ail gin the questions, and mrs. lowey and i both came in with the question we want to ask first and that concerns president abbas' actions yesterday. as you know the provisions of

u.s. law that restrict funding if the palestinians obtain member status at the u.n. and its agencies such as unesco outside an agreement with israel, as i said in my opening statement, it's unclear the ramifications now because of what they have done. but please give us your interpretation of what happened, and why it happened. and explain the impact on the peace process and where the palestinians action also trig' cutoff of aid to any u.s. agencies or economic aid for the palestinians. >> thank you for that question. we are all completely seized with this issue and i think you have heard secretary kerry speak to it already. let me say just a few things. first, as i said in my opening statement and as we discussed privately as well, the united states opposes all unilateral actions, any where they may occur in the international

system, including where i work every day at the united nations. there are no short cuts to statehood. we have made that clear. efforts that attempt to circumvent the peace process, the hard slog of the peace process, are only going to be counterproductive to the peace process itself and the ultimate objective of securing statehood, the objective that the palestinian authority has. we have contested every effort even prior to the restart of negotiations, spearheaded by secretary kerry. every time the palestinians have sought to make a move on a u.s. agency, treaty, etc., we have opposed it. by the same token, given this apparent move on a number of treaties, secretary kerry and all of us have made clear, again, that we oppose unilateral actions and that they are going to be tremendously disruptive and that they will not achieve the desired end. so that's the first point i

think which is in keeping with our traditional position. in terms of its impact on the peace process, which is a question you raised, i think what secretary kerry has said, he's still -- this is a very fluid situation. it just came about yesterday. he's working it probably as we speak, certainly was working it all day yesterday and this morning, it is, i think, premature to make a final judgment on what impact this will have on the peace talks and on the prospects for negotiated settlement. i wouldn't want to prejudge that. as you mentioned, the palestinians have pursued in this instance, it seems, treaty membership. we will need to see, again, what it is that they have submitted before being able to speak to what the ramifications are. if i could continue to work with you in the days ahead. and then finally, on the question of the u.n. waiver, as you know the united states has

pursued a national interest waiver, notwithstanding our strong and relentless opposition to unilateral efforts at enhancement of status and unilateral efforts at statehood. the reason we have sought this waiver and it's so critically important is that in the event that the palestinians seek and obtain membership in the u.n. agency, the last thing we want to do is give them a double win, and it would be a double win for them to secure a win at the agency on one hand and exclusion of the united states from that very agency, leaving the agency at the mercy of leadership from russia, china, cuba, venezuela. the countries that tend to fill the space when we depart. again our goal is to use the u.n. system to advance the interest of the united states and the american people, being excluded from those agencies does not allow us to do that, and of course, we can go through

agency by agency, if you like, but you're familiar with these organizations as i am, vaccinations for children, weapons inspectors in the iaea, the postal system. this is the international system and it is strongly in the u.s. national interest to be a part of it. but that in no way detracts from the firmness of our opposition to palestinian unilateral moves. >> prior to mrs. lowey, i would like for all the members, this is a very active subcommittee and the membership in the subcommittee will have many questions. if we can stick to the timeline i think we can make more than one round of questions. i turn to mrs. lowey. >> thank you, madam chair. again welcome. i'm going to move to another issue, but i just want to associate myself with the comments of the chair. as one who has been very optimistic about a potential peace process and has strongly supported secretary kerry's efforts and his determination to

bring the parties together, it was extremely disappointing to to take u mass chose this action at the u.n. it is counterproductive. doesn't move them closer to any final resolution, and i think it was wrong-headed and very, very disappointing. but i want to move on to another issue. frankly, i wonder whether secretary kerry can save the process in light of this action. move on to iran for a moment. we understand that iran now faces domestic pressure and international isolation. while i believe the pressure of sanctions and the demand for a better economy puts the supreme leader to allow the selection of the president, i'm not convinced there has been a change in heart and i'm very concerned about that and the overall iranian

leadership. i remain concerned that the election of rouhani and subsequent charm offensive was nothing more than a political monnufere or facade to break the unity of national sanctions by make identifying ran appear to be cooperative. we have every reason to believe and to question iran's real intentions given their track record and history of deception. so a couple of questions. many people have argued in the congress that the threat of additional sanctions is necessary to pressure iran to stay at the negotiating table until we have an acceptable final deal. if you can share with us your opinion on that. maybe i'll just group these because you are keeping the time pretty tight and you can respond in any way you choose. how does the security council

respond if iran does not agree to a final deal? and the secretary of state has sed that no deal is better than a bad deal. and i wonder what you would consider a bad deal. the preamblecerns, to the joint plan of action states that under no circumstances will iran ever seek or develop any nuclear weapons. so i have been very distressed o learn that the iaea cannot inspect or gain acksess -- access to a facility where they do weaponization testing, it's been rumored. if you can comment on the whole deal and you can speak to why the jpoa does not allow iaea to inspect the sites where delivering mechanisms made, it seems to be that such sites is an integral part of nuclear

capability. if you can just comment in general i would be most -- and specific on the paragraphchant issue. >> thank you, congresswoman. let me just make a few comments if i can. you certainly put your finger on some core issues. first, we share your skepticism. we share your lack of trust. there's no way one can look at the u.s.-iranian relationship over the course of the last three decades and bring anything other than discriminate skepticism and lack of trust. that's the mindset that our diplomats have brought at every turn to our engagements with the p-5 plus one and with iran. i think president obama has been clear that in the event that these talks break down and iran -- and this agreement does not provide a foundation for a long-term agreement, that we believe will 14u9 down -- shut

down iran's nuclear weapons program, and deny them a prospect of detaining a nuclear weapon, he'll be leading the charge up here for additional sanctions to impose further pressure on the regime. right now we are seeking to take advantage of a diplomatic window that again as the president has said will not remain open for long. and talks are opening again, i believe, next week where undersecretary sherman has already -- on her way. >> if i may just comment. you can respond on the sanctions issue. i know it's been an issue with a great deal of difference of opinion on the part of the organization. the $6 billion in sanctions a d be put in place in nanosecond. you and i know that any additional sanctions can take 180 days to put in place. ied that 230r the record. >> to under-- for the record. to underscore, again, that the

overwhelming majority of sanctions remain in place and that the iranian economy is still in the vice of sanctions put in place, not only here by the congress and by the executive, but also this criming round, four rounds of multilateral sanction that is have come from the u.n. security council. and that international sanctions regime, your second question, has been a critical complement and force multiplier of what we have done ourselves here as the united states. so you asked where will the u.n. security council be. one of the reasons it's very important we keep the p-5 plus one together, which is not always easy but is critical, is that on the back end of either a comprehensive agreement at some later stage, when all of our conditions are met, or in the event of a collapse of talks,

that we would then be in a position to act together at the security council. the other thing i want to say because i don't think it's as evident because of all of the focus on the gpoa, is that we still have not only the robust multilateral sanctions regime in new york, but the sanctions committee, panel of experts, we are as a united states at the very time we are engaging testing this diplomatic window, speaking to end this what is a crisis diplomatically, we are enforcing the sanctions that are on the books and seeking to close any loopholes that may exist in this multilateral sanctions regime. i mention this because of course rael just interdicted a ship that was weapons -- carrying weapons from iran to militants in gaza. that's something we are now demanding that the sanctions committee take up in new york and figure out what the implications that have are. again in addition to the bilateral sanctions that the --

sanctions designations of individuals and entities that have happened since the gpoa, we in new york are also looking to take further action on the basis of the very crippling regime that exists. i'm well over time let me just maybe if i could speak to the paragraphchant issue. . they must work with issues of concern. this is the formula that is used by the iaea and iran in addressing possible military dimensions which is of course why you're so concerned about parchan and that includes parchan. what the gpoa says is a comprehensive solution requires not just the final step but also resolution of concerns which is understood, again, to hit the military dimension. so the more plain english to put it is the interim, the gpoa,