[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 137 (Monday, September 12, 2016)] [House] [Pages H5272-H5274] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] STATE SPONSORS OF TERRORISM REVIEW ENHANCEMENT ACT Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5484) to modify authorities that provide for rescission of determinations of countries as state sponsors of terrorism, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 5484 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``State Sponsors of Terrorism Review Enhancement Act''. SEC. 2. MODIFICATIONS OF AUTHORITIES THAT PROVIDE FOR RESCISSION OF DETERMINATIONS OF COUNTRIES AS STATE SPONSORS OF TERRORISM. (a) Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.--Section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2371) is amended-- (1) in subsection (c)(2)-- (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking ``45 days'' and inserting ``90 days''; and (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``6-month period'' and inserting ``24-month period''; (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); (3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following: ``(d) Disapproval of Rescission.--No rescission under subsection (c)(2) of a determination under subsection (a) with respect to the government of a country may be made if the Congress, within 90 days after receipt of a report under subsection (c)(2), enacts a joint resolution described in subsection (f)(2) of section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act with respect to a rescission under subsection (f)(1) of such section of a determination under subsection (d) of such section with respect to the government of such country.''; (4) in subsection (e) (as redesignated), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``may be'' and inserting ``may, on a case-by-case basis, be''; and (5) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(f) Notification and Briefing.--Not later than-- ``(1) ten days after initiating a review of the activities of the government of the country concerned within the 24- month period referred to in subsection (c)(2)(A), the President, acting through the Secretary of State, shall notify the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate of such initiation; and ``(2) 20 days after the notification described in paragraph (1), the President, acting through the Secretary of State, shall brief such committees on the status of such review.''. (b) Arms Export Control Act.--Section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2780) is amended-- (1) in subsection (f)-- (A) in paragraph (1)(B)-- (i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``45 days'' and inserting ``90 days''; and (ii) in clause (i), by striking ``6-month period'' and inserting ``24-month period''; and (B) in paragraph (2)-- (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``45 days'' and inserting ``90 days''; and (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``45-day period'' and inserting ``90-day period''; (2) in subsection (g), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``may waive'' and inserting ``may, on a case-by-case basis, waive''; (3) by redesignating subsection (l) as subsection (m); and (4) by inserting after subsection (k) the following new subsection: ``(l) Notification and Briefing.--Not later than-- ``(1) ten days after initiating a review of the activities of the government of the country concerned within the 24- month period referred to in subsection (f)(1)(B)(i), the President, acting through the Secretary of State, shall notify the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate of such initiation; and ``(2) 20 days after the notification described in paragraph (1), the President, acting through the Secretary of State, shall brief such committees on the status of such review.''. (c) Export Administration Act of 1979.-- (1) In general.--Section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)), as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, is amended-- (A) in paragraph (4)(B)-- (i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``45 days'' and inserting ``90 days''; and (ii) in clause (i), by striking ``6-month period'' and inserting ``24-month period''; (B) by redesignating paragraphs (6) and (7) as paragraphs (7) and (8), respectively; and (C) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new paragraphs: ``(5) Disapproval of Rescission.--No rescission under paragraph (4)(B) of a determination under paragraph (1)(A) with respect to the government of a country may be made if the Congress, within 90 days after receipt of a report under paragraph (4)(B), enacts a joint resolution described in subsection (f)(2) of section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act with respect to a rescission under subsection (f)(1) of such section of a determination under subsection (d) of such section with respect to the government of such country. ``(6) Notification and Briefing.--Not later than-- ``(A) ten days after initiating a review of the activities of the government of the country concerned within the 24- month period referred to in paragraph (4)(B)(i), the President, acting through the Secretary and the Secretary of State, shall notify the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate of such initiation; and ``(B) 20 days after the notification described in paragraph (1), the President, acting through the Secretary and the Secretary of State, shall brief such committees on the status of such review.''. (2) Regulations.--The President shall amend the Export Administration Regulations under subchapter C of chapter VII of title 15, Code of Federal Regulations, to the extent necessary and appropriate to carry out the amendment made by paragraph (1). The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California. General Leave Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the measure. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from California? There was no objection. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho), for his leadership in authoring this critical legislation. The designation of a foreign government as a state sponsor of terrorism is one of our government's most powerful statements. In addition to imposing sanctions and other restrictions, the designation itself earns a state pariah status internationally, and that is deserved. After all, these are countries [[Page H5273]] whose governments back the killing of innocents as a matter of policy. To be added to the list, the Secretary of State must determine that the government of such country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. The designation then triggers unilateral sanctions by the United States. These sanctions include a ban on exports of weapons. It also includes limits on financing and economic assistance and restrictions on exports that can be used by that country to enhance its military capability or, of course, its ability to support terrorism. These are important tools. They are powerful tools. Yet, under current law, to delist a state sponsor of terrorism, the administration only needs to certify that the country has refrained from supporting terrorism for a mere 6 months. Administrations from both parties have abused this process. In 2008, North Korea's designation was rescinded following commitments it made to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. North Korea, of course, was delisted prematurely, but it kept its nuclear program, as evidenced by its fifth nuclear test last week. Likewise, Cuba continues to harbor terrorists, both foreign and domestic terrorists. It continues to meddle in Venezuela. It continues its support for Iran's designs on Latin America. Just last month, Cuba hosted the Iranian foreign minister, as Tehran seeks to expand its presence in the hemisphere. This legislation is an important check against administration overreach, increasing the period of time a country must refrain from supporting terrorism from 6 months to 2 years before it is eligible for being delisted. The bill also increases the period of time that Congress has to review any such proposed action by the President from 45 days to 90 days. So the bill strengthens congressional oversight of the process. I strongly urge my colleagues to support the legislation authored by Mr. Ted Yoho. I think it is critical. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this measure. I want to thank Chairman Royce and Mr. Yoho of Florida for their hard work on the bill. Mr. Speaker, under current law, there are only two ways off the State Sponsors of Terrorism list. The first is a fundamental change in the leadership and policies of a country's government. The other is if the President certifies to Congress that a government has not provided any support for international terrorism for at least 6 months, and that the country has provided assurances that it will not support international terrorism in the future. This legislation would stretch that 6-month period to 2 years. It would also double the length of time Congress has to review such a certification, from 45 days to 90 days. Now, Mr. Speaker, I don't think we are going to find ourselves in a situation in which any of the countries currently on that list would need to be rushed off, particularly Syria and Iran. But our job as legislators is not just to look at what is in front of us as we draft a law, but to consider what unintended consequences we might face down the road. As I said when we marked up this bill in June at the committee, I do think we need to carefully consider the implications of extending the waiting period so dramatically. No one wants a terrorist state to come off the list before circumstances justify, but unlikely as it may seem today, we could encounter diplomatic opportunities where the flexibility to act quickly might be in our own national security interests. We just can't envision what kind of challenges we will face years down the road. So I support the measure, but I do have some trepidation that the 2- year waiting period could potentially hamstring our government's ability to respond strategically to rapidly changing events. I hope that, as we monitor this, Members will keep an open mind with respect to the waiting period as the legislative process goes forward. Again, I support the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the chairman emeritus of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and Dr. Yoho for putting forth this wonderful bill. The State Sponsors of Terrorism Review Enhancement Act is the work of our Florida colleague, Ted Yoho. I thank Dr. Yoho for his leadership on this bill, as well as Chairman Royce and Ranking Member Engel for their leadership in getting it to the House floor. This bill is an important and necessary legislative fix to a broken process: the manner in which nations are delisted as state sponsors of terrorism. Over the years, through three different statutes, Congress developed the State Sponsors of Terrorism list and the consequences for being on the list. The three laws--the Foreign Assistance Act, the Arms Export Control Act, and the Export Administration Act--work to prevent state sponsors of terrorism from receiving assistance, goods, and technology that could help support terrorism. In past decades, administrations from both sides of the aisle have mistakenly and prematurely delisted states, for example, including taking North Korea off the list in 2008, as the chairman pointed out, and removing Cuba, as the chairman pointed out, last year. North Korea has armed and supported organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas and has reportedly assisted the regime in Syria and in Iran in developing their nuclear weapons program. Other examples of North Korea's provocations and destructive behavior are prolific, including continued illegal nuclear weapons tests like the one that we just saw last week; missiles launches; cyberattacks, sinking a South Korean naval vessel; and shipping weapons systems likes those that were intercepted out of Cuba in the year 2013. Cuba has links to North Korea and state sponsors of terrorism Iran and Syria. It provides safe haven to terror groups like the Colombian FARC and Spanish ETA, and harbors fugitives, as the chairman pointed out, from American justice, like convicted cop killer JoAnne Chesimard. As we saw in the cases of Cuba and North Korea, the process in which Congress is able to weigh in on whether a nation should or should not be delisted as a state sponsor of terrorism is a broken process, and only one of three laws provides a legislative mechanism to stop it. Only one. This bill aims to fix that, extending the amount of time that Congress has to review an administration's proposal to delist a country and providing Congress with a mechanism, under each law, to block its removal by enacting a joint resolution of disapproval. It is a simple legislative fix, Mr. Speaker, that allows Congress to fulfill its oversight responsibility, determine whether these countries are still supporting terrorism, and prevent them from being delisted should there not be enough evidence for their removal. Congress needs to have the ability that it always had and that we thought it had to weigh in on attempts to remove countries from the list and to ensure that countries that are still supporting terrorism remain sanctioned, restricted from any material that they might be receiving that could aid in their terrorism, and remain on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list where they belong. So it makes a change to the law, the review process that should have been made a long time ago. I thank Dr. Yoho for doing this. It allows Congress to execute its proper oversight responsibilities and prevent the executive branch from delisting countries as state sponsors of terrorism prematurely. We have seen in cases of both North Korea and Cuba, delisted by Republican and Democratic administrations respectively, that giving these nations these concessions only emboldens the rogue regimes and undermines our national security. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho), the author of this important antiterrorism legislation. Mr. YOHO. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Royce, Ranking Member Engel, and my colleague, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, for the kind words and for [[Page H5274]] pointing out that, just 2 years ago, Cuba was caught shipping armaments to North Korea. I stand in support, obviously, of the bill, H.R. 5484, the State Sponsors of Terrorism Review Enhancement Act. This designation of a foreign government, as Mr. Royce has already pointed out, as a state sponsor of terrorism, is one of the United States' most powerful statements as a nation that we can stamp on another country. Besides imposing sanctions, the stamp of state sponsor of terrorism labels a state untouchable to the international community. This pariah status, as pointed out, is much deserved, as these are states that support the killing of innocent people as a matter of policy. However, under current law, in order for a state to be delisted, the President of the United States only needs to certify that the country being considered for delisting has not engaged in supporting terrorism for a paltry 6 months. As Ms. Ros-Lehtinen pointed out, just 2 years ago, Cuba sent missiles to North Korea. Considering the heinous acts of violence these countries have supported in the past, we should not be allowing them to be delisted for political purposes or whatever reasons after only 6 months. This increases the oversight of one of Congress' oldest committees, the Foreign Affairs Committee, and adds another layer of protection not just for America, but for the world community. {time} 1600 To address this, my legislation will quadruple the time a designated country must refrain from sponsoring terrorism before the President can remove it from the sponsor list from 6 months to 24 months; it increases congressional oversight by doubling the time Congress has to review the President's proposed removal from 45 to 90 days; it establishes a uniform process through which Congress can disapprove of the President's decision to remove a country from the list; and it requires the administration to notify and brief Congress--and I think this is probably one of the most important things--upon initiating a review of a designated country's potential removal from that list. This legislation will assert congressional scrutiny and oversight and, hopefully, bring to an end politically motivated delistings. Successive administrations, as was pointed out, both Republicans and Democrats alike, delisted countries based on their Precedency's legacy rather than the facts. H.R. 5484 will stop absurd delistings like that of North Korea in 2008. As we have already talked about, North Korea was delisted in exchange for their promise of dismantling their nuclear program. However, 8 years and five nuclear tests later, as the gentleman pointed out, they remain off the list and threatening America with their videos and their acts of irresponsibility, North Korea, supporting terrorism abroad. By increasing the amount of time for a state to not be engaged in terrorism and increasing congressional oversight and scrutiny, H.R. 5484, hopefully, will not allow mistakes such as the delisting of North Korea to take place. Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the chairman again, and thank Mr. Yoho for his hard work and commitment on this. Obviously, the handful of countries on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list are some of the worst actors in the world: Sudan, Syria, and Iran. We need policies that are tough, and any changes to that list must be preceded by real, permanent changes in the way those governments do business. And, of course, I believe Congress has an important oversight role to play on such matters. I have voiced my concerns about parts of this legislation, namely, that multiplying the waiting period by a factor of four might have unintended consequences. Perhaps it should have been a little less than that. But I trust that if we do run into trouble down the road, we will do whatever it takes to make sure that our government has the tools needed to act in America's best interests. So I support this measure and, again, I thank Mr. Yoho for his hard work. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, 6 months to get off of that list for a terrorist country, that is an odd situation. We should not be giving terrorist regimes a clean bill of health in such a short time in that, by definition, these are regimes that kill innocents as a matter of policy. That is what terrorism is. And given that this process has been abused, in the case of North Korea, what is to prevent another White House from removing countries from the list to advance their own flawed agendas? Congress, I think, has a responsibility to prevent that from happening; and, ultimately, these regimes must understand that the only way to be delisted is to actually change their behavior and discontinue their support for terrorism, not simply press for their status to be reversed as a condition of a separate negotiation. That is what North Korea did some years ago. That is what concerns us here. Again, I would like to recognize Mr. Yoho for his excellent work on this legislation, and I urge its adoption. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5484. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________