January 19, 2006
East Haddam, CT - Senator Chris Dodd applauded today's decision by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services in Hartford to release Rosalie Desardouin from custody in Boston and reunite her with her family in Norwich. She will be able to pursue her application for permanent residency.

"This is wonderful news. I'm very happy for Rosalie, Audrin, and their children. It never made any sense to split up this family and I commend the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office for reconsidering and ultimately reversing their decision. This is a great day for the Desardouin family, and I'm proud to have played a role in making it a reality."

Statement by Senator Christopher J. Dodd
Conditioning Election Assistance for Haiti
July 2005

Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, my amendment relates to the situation in Haiti which cries out for our attention. I have spoken about my concerns with respect to the ongoing crisis in Haiti many times on this floor, as have some of my colleagues such as Senator DeWine.

Apparently those concerns have fallen on deaf ears in the Bush administration. Unfortunately, no one in the current Administration has made Haiti a priority – and it shows.

I support providing assistance to Haiti – but I don’t support throwing money down the drain. Frankly, monies in this appropriations bill in support of the current election schedule are monies that will be totally wasted unless and until the Bush Administration gets serious about addressing the foundations of that insecurity – the absence of the rule of law and the presence of armed groups who terrorize Haiti’s cities and towns.

That is why I offer this amendment today to insist that prior to one penny of this money being spent on the election process that we in the Congress be informed about the administration’s game plan for Haiti – if it has one. And if one does not exist, that they must develop such a plan so that US taxpayer monies aren’t totally wasted on elections that will be deemed illegitimate at best.

I don’t think that elections are the be all and end all for solving Haiti’s problems. Frankly, I am increasingly of the view that more international involvement is needed in Haiti over an extended period before any Haitian government has a chance of successfully governing a country which at this juncture is ungovernable. But increased international involvement is unthinkable without US leadership.

The political, economic and social chaos that exists in Haiti has created one of the most serious humanitarian crises confronting the international community. More than a year after the ouster of former President Aristide, most Haitians have seen already abysmal living conditions get even worse. According to U.S. officials in Haiti, most Haitians live on a dollar a day, more than forty percent of children are malnourished, and childbirth is the second leading cause of death among women.

Haiti’s AIDS infection rate is the highest outside sub-Saharan Africa, and an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 Haitian children are born with the virus each year. The average Haitian has a life expectancy of 51 years—20 years short of the Latin American/ Caribbean average of 71.

Haiti’s economy is also in a shambles. Growth in gross domestic product has been negative in that country for two decades running. Profits from traditional exports of coffee, rice, rum and other agricultural products of the formal economy are less than half of what they were twenty years ago. Now, remittances from Haitians living abroad are one of the main sources of income. In fact, these remittances account for almost one-third of Haiti’s GDP.

What has been the Bush Administration’s response to the Haitian crisis? Frankly Mr. President, the administration has been AWOL. While they were quick to seize the opportunity to facilitate the removal of the democratically elected president from office, since then there has been a decided disinterest on the part of the administration with respect to the fate of the Haitian people.

Last July, the United States pledged approximately $230 million in aid for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. This past April, the Senate passed the DeWine/Bingaman amendment, of which I was a co-sponsor, providing $20 million for election assistance, employment, and public works. But all of the assistance in the world isn’t going to solve Haiti’s problem until we begin to address the levels of insecurity that exist in that country.

Haiti borders on being a failed state if it isn’t one already. Yet this administration continues to suggest that elections should go forward later this year so that the Haitian people can replace the interim government with one that is democratically chosen by them.

Last month Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega and special envoys from France, Canada, and Brazil visited Port au Prince and said that Haiti’s political transition was on target. They said that the date for the presidential and legislative elections, November 13th, should remain fixed. I wonder how anyone could visit Haiti and come to that conclusion.

Last December, Senator DeWine and I were told that we could not visit Port au Prince because the security situation was too dangerous. In late May of this year, the State Department issued the following travel warning on Haiti.
“Due to the volatile security situation, the Department has ordered the departure of non-emergency personnel and all family members of U.S. Embassy personnel. The Department of State warns U.S. citizens to defer travel to Haiti and urges American citizens to depart the country if they can do so safely.”

Mr. President, that travel warning remains in effect today.

Yet the administration would have us believe that things are on track for holding elections as currently scheduled. Unless there is dramatic action, the likelihood of fair elections with widespread voter participation in the near future is remote if not impossible. Currently, fewer than 100,000 of 4 million potential voters have been registered and fewer than a quarter of the necessary registration centers are open. As important, the role of all parties in the elections needs to be protected.

All parties must have a fair and equal chance if these elections are going to be legitimate. Ultimately, what should matter most to the United States is that, institutionally, these elections are legitimate and fair. Whoever wins must make reforms, purge corrupt officials, and work to improve security.

US engagement on the security situation is just the first step of what will be a long, uphill battle if we are going to get this right. Holding elections for the sake of holding elections on some rigid schedule makes no sense. Elections, particularly elections with little or no credibility isn’t going to solve Haiti’s problems it is simply going to compound them.

Haiti is a humanitarian crisis. For that reason alone the United States should be more engaged. But frankly, after sending troops to Haiti four times in the past 90 years, it is also in our economic interest to address this problem resolutely.

We should start by reviving Senator DeWine’s HERO Act, which would help reinvigorate the Haitian economy by granting preferential trade agreements to certain Haitian textile products. The Senate passed the HERO Act last year, but it met opposition in the House. If the HERO act were passed, it could help to strengthen Haiti’s economy, and jumpstart real employment. Especially now, that the Senate has passed and the House will soon act on the Dominican Republic-Central American free trade agreement, this is doubly important. After all, it simply doesn’t make sense to help the Dominican Republic and leave out Haiti, which shares the other half of Hispaniola with that country.

As it stands now, the options for honest employment are slim to none in the Haitian city centers, particularly in the slums of the capital, Port au Prince. The major employers there are warring gangs, many of them involved in trafficking cocaine.

Indeed, Haiti is a major transit point for cocaine coming in from South American counties such as Columbia. From 2000 to 2004, approximately 8% of the cocaine coming into the U.S. passed through Haiti.

Entire neighborhoods are under the control of these criminal gangs, who are responsible for killings, robberies, and, increasingly, kidnappings. Authorities in the interim government estimate that each day there are 6 to 12 kidnappings in Port au Prince alone.

In total, more than 700 people, including seven peacekeepers, have been killed in Haiti in the past eight months. MINUSTAH forces have tried to respond to the security threats. But frankly, MINUSTAH is not in a position to quell the violence in Haiti’s major cities or to secure many of Haiti’s major roads, both of which are now under the control of criminal gangs.

For one, they are trying to protect a population roughly equal to that of New York City with a force far smaller than New York’s 40,000 well equipped and trained police officers. I hope that the recent U.N. Security Council authorization for an additional 1,000 troops and police officers will help MINUSTAH wrest control away from criminals.

Secondly, and perhaps even more important than sheer numbers, the United Nations mandate does not give MINUSTAH real authority over the Haitian National Police, a force in severe disarray.

There are good men and women in the National Police, but there are many bad ones who need to be removed. If MINUSTAH wants the trust of civilians, they need to make sure the Haitian National Police do not ignore human rights violations in the face of high insecurity, which only fuels the cycle of violence. Simply put, MINUSTAH’s credibility is directly tied to its ability to bring calm and prevent abuses. To that end, civilians should be able to contact UN forces directly about abuses by the National Police.

I am also troubled that the interim government, led by President Boniface Alexandre and Prime Minister Gerard Latortue, has delayed justice for thousands of prisoners. Roughly 20 of the more than 7,000 prisoners at the federal penitentiary have been convicted of crimes. Many of them have spent years awaiting travel. I am particularly concerned with the treatment of former Prime Minister Yvon Neptune who has been held without formal charges for about a year and is near death after a series of off-and-on hunger strikes, which he began in February. Now, in the sixth month of his protest, his rib cage sticks out of his skin and he cannot speak above a whisper.

On May 25th, the emaciated Mr. Neptune was carried to his first hearing on a stretcher, where he testified for several hours. He denied the accusations that he masterminded the killings of 25 Haitians in the town of St.-Marc and has refused to leave Haiti until his name is cleared. The basic point here is that when it comes to legal issues, it is imperative that the Interim Government set the tone that the rule of law matters. If they do not set the example at the top, lawlessness will not improve at the bottom.

My amendment is meant to serve as a small wake up call to the Administration, that the Congress is watching. And it is meant to send the message that Haiti is only going to have a future if we are prepared to extend a helping hand.

What we need now is resolve, and a serious commitment from the highest levels of our government to help bring peace, security, and stability to the people of this small island nation. We’ve lost interest before. The result is clear and we can’t afford to do it again.

The United States should help the Haitian people create an honest government, committed to justice, committed to combating poverty, committed to democracy and to a better Haiti. I hope the Bush administration will make that commitment. I hope that forcing them to take a serious look at conditions on the ground and responding accordingly will produce results.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.

In our decision to impose a trade embargo against Cuba, the United States stands alone in the world. After four decades, it is clear that our approach has failed to achieve its intended goals – the end of Fidel Castro’s regime and a peaceful transition to democracy. Today, Cuba remains under totalitarian rule, and Castro remains firmly in power.

Sadly, the only real victims of our policies are the 11 million innocent Cuban men, women, and children. Our embargo has exacerbated the already-miserable living conditions for Cuban citizens. Cuba’s economy has suffered greatly because it is prohibited from exporting goods to the United States. In addition, ordinary Cubans have very limited access to American products. Moreover, our policies abridge Americans’ right to travel freely to Cuba, making exchange between our two cultures essentially impossible.

Statement by Senator Christopher J. Dodd on
The Presidential Crisis in Ecuador
April 2005

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the ongoing Presidential crisis in the nation of Ecuador. Last Wednesday, Ecuador’s President, Lucio Gutierrez, was voted out of power by that country’s Congress. Early yesterday morning, President Gutierrez was allowed to leave the country for Brazil, which has since granted him asylum.

Popular protests in Ecuador led to the congressional action that removed President Gutierrez from office. This decision might or might not be constitutionally and democratically sound. But it certainly raises some major concerns – both with respect to Ecuador and the larger region.

Let me be clear. I’m not here to defend President Gutierrez. Like any President in a democratic country, he should be accountable to the people. As should the Congress. Accountability is vital in any democracy, and if elected officials lose their popular support, then the people of that nation should have a right to use the democratic process to elect new leaders.

But as we’ve seen elsewhere, democracy can sometimes be used for undemocratic purposes. I am concerned that this might have been the case in Ecuador. Indeed, the Ecuadorian Congress voted to remove President Gutierrez from power for “abandonment of the post” – even though he was still in the government palace issuing orders.

His opponents claim that Congress was justified in this act because the President wasn’t living up to his responsibilities. However, that action has raised enough concern that the Organization of American States (OAS) has asked Ecuador’s new government to explain the move. And tellingly, neither the OAS, nor its member nations, has yet recognized Ecuador’s new government.

Certainly, Ecuador is no stranger to political instability. Since 1997, three Presidents have been driven from office before completing their terms. Now, Alfredo Palacio has taken President Gutierrez’ place, has named a new cabinet, and is working to curry support for the new government.

But he is not only working to gain international support for his administration. He is also working to gain domestic legitimacy. Why does he need to do this? Because Ecuador’s unrest is not only about transgressions by one President or another. It is representative of a broader situation – one that is mirrored throughout the hemisphere.

That is why it is important to put this phenomenon into context.

For nearly five years now, the Bush administration has paid scant attention to critical problems in our hemisphere. It has focused on promoting limited free trade agreements where it can, but for the most part has turned a blind eye to the other problems our hemisphere faces.

Indeed, although the Administration has taken some limited actions – such as in helping Argentina recover from economic collapse – most major issues have been virtually ignored.

For example, poverty and economic disparities continue to go largely unaddressed. According to a 2004 report by the United Nations Development Program, progress in extending elective democracy across Latin America is threatened by ongoing social and economic turmoil. The report even suggests that over 50 percent of the population of Latin America would be willing to sacrifice democratic government for real progress on the economic and social fronts.

In addition, in many places, endemic corruption as well as a lack of political transparency continues to be pervasive. As a result, many Latin American citizens do not express confidence in their political institutions.

The results are obvious. From Haiti to Ecuador, political instability has already boiled over. Stability in a number of other nations is also at risk. And the two major victims of this instability have been the people of these countries, and more generally, democracy in our hemisphere. So when we talk about the current crisis in Ecuador, we’re really talking about a larger and very disturbing trend.

In January 2005, my colleagues Senators Bill Nelson, Lincoln Chafee, and I visited Venezuela, Paraguay, Argentina, Peru and Ecuador. Without a doubt, we saw much promise. But our trip and discussions with political and economic leaders also underscored the perils our hemisphere faces. What is at stake here is regional stability, the rule of law, democracy, and the continuation of market reforms.

So in a sense, Ecuador is just the tip of the iceberg. Ultimately, it will be up to the people of Ecuador, and the people of each nation in our hemisphere, to decide whether they walk the path of promise or the path of peril.

But the US has a role here. With respect to Ecuador, all the Bush Administration has been willing to do thus far is to pay lip service to the rule of law and democratic institutions. That is a far cry from the proactive role it should be taking in helping to promote and protect these things in Ecuador. More importantly, it couldn’t be farther from the role we need to be playing in our hemisphere if we are going to be successful at protecting the future of democratic institutions for all people.

Simply put, the Bush Administration needs more than an ideology for its dealings with our hemisphere. It also needs a plan that realistically addresses the conditions on the ground – and it needs to put that plan into action.

These past five years have been marked by the lack of such a plan. They have also been marked by a noticeable void – the void in leadership that the US has left by withdrawing from our friends and neighbors in the region. To this Senator, the damaging results of these policies couldn’t be more clear. Let’s all hope that Secretary Rice’s upcoming visit to the region signals that the Bush Administration is also beginning to see those results.

Opening Statement by Senator Christopher J. Dodd
On The Future of Economic Relations in the Western Hemisphere
May 20, 2003

The Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Narcotics Affairs of the Foreign Relations Committee has convened this afternoon to discuss, in my view, one of the most important topics facing Congress and the President: the Future of Economic Relations in the Western Hemisphere. I commend the Subcommittee Chairman, Senator Coleman for organizing this hearing. There is no doubt that today’s discussion will serve both to highlight the progress we have made thus far , as well as the challenges ahead as we strive to integrate this hemisphere.

Certainly, America and its neighbors have made considerable advances towards expanding and liberalizing trade relations in our hemisphere. Over the past two decades, we have witnessed the establishment and implementation of significant initiatives, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), and Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA). All three have brought increased cooperation and communication. They have been positive forces that promote political and economic stability, as well as growth and democracy.

Indeed, healthy and strong trade relations contribute to the vibrancy of a nation’s economy. In 2002, United States agricultural exports to the Western Hemisphere were approximately $4.2 billion. If the NAFTA countries are included in this calculation, the total amounts to over $20 billion. These statistics are an obvious indication of the substantial benefits that accrue to the US from such agreements.

As we are all aware, Latin America and the Caribbean have many significant problems. Throughout the past year, some of our neighbors in this Hemisphere have been plagued by economic and political instability, narco-terrorism, and public health challenges. The illegal narcotics trade and its devastating impacts persist, poverty rates are high, and access to education and health care remain alarmingly limited. From the southern most tip of the South American continent and closer to home in the Caribbean region, many of our friends have been struggling to create and ensure a safe and secure future for their people.

I strongly believe that successful efforts to achieve a Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and eventually in 2005, a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), will help further these goals. As well, the United States stands to benefit along with our neighbors from increased trade relations throughout the hemisphere.

Towards that end, I am encouraged that CAFTA negotiations appear to be on track, with the fourth of nine rounds taking place just this past week. Hopefully, CAFTA will be finalized according to the current timetable – at the end of 2003. I am also heartened that FTAA negotiations are continuing to move forward, and I look forward to the presentation of the third draft agreement at the next scheduled meeting in late November 2003.

However, although FTAA and CAFTA are on the horizon, we must not neglect individual initiatives such as the Chile Free Trade Agreement, which is currently awaiting the President’s signature. By implementing the Chile FTA, the United States will be sending a clear signal that we are going to continue the close and essential relationship we have established with our partners in the Southern Hemisphere. Given the many difficulties facing the region, as well as doubt over the intentions of the United States with regards to FTAA, the importance of a Chile FTA cannot be overstated.

Certainly, there are a number of subjects that need to be addressed during FTAA negotiations. Firstly, reaching an accord with participating nations on agricultural issues will be of prime importance to the success of any agreement. As we can already see from current efforts, the successful crafting of agricultural provisions is a complicated process. Therefore, it is my hope that the Administration will work vigorously, and together with our partners, to shape a practical, sensible, and viable agricultural policy for a future FTAA.

Secondly, it is important that the commitments of participating nations to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in matters such as the protection of intellectual property laws are maintained. And, for those nations that are not currently in compliance with WTO standards, it is imperative that in the coming years, they take measures to bring themselves into compliance. Many countries have already begun this process. It is my hope that this positive trend continues.

I also understand that certain sectors of American industry have fared less well than others under the increased competition brought on by international trade. That is why I strongly believe it is imperative that as President Bush implements the powers given to him under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), he takes all necessary measures to ensure that our trading partners comply with important labor and environmental standards. Not only will this help to safeguard the lives of workers globally and the natural resources on which we all depend, it will help ensure that American companies can successfully compete in today’s global market.

FTAA is the economic future for our hemisphere. The example set by previous agreements such as NAFTA is clear. NAFTA has bound the United States, Canada, and Mexico more closely together; it is an important aspect of our close relationships with these countries. The establishment of FTAA will require that we develop similar relationships with our neighbors throughout the hemisphere. Such relationships are the key to promoting American interests at home and abroad.

Today’s hearing with its focus on agriculture issues will help us to understand the issues the issues that we must mutually find answers to in order to ensure that those interests are maximized.

I look forward to this afternoon’s testimony by our expert witnesses.

Statement by Senator Christopher J. Dodd on
The Global AIDS Crisis
May 15, 2003

Mr. President, no challenge is more daunting in scope or immediate in need than the Global AIDS crisis. I rise today with the utmost urgency to speak of this modern-day plague and to urge my colleagues to ensure that the legislation currently pending before the United States Senate is both swift in its passage and effective in its nature.

The global AIDS pandemic threatens to undermine all of our other efforts to bring stability and prosperity to the world. AIDS is an unparalleled crisis, and it threatens to have a potentially irreversible effect. Every country around the globe will, in one way or another, feel the devastating impact of this disease; no nation will be spared.

Certainly, I applaud the Administration for its initiative on this important issue. We all do. And, the bill currently before this chamber – which closely reflects the Administration’s requests – provides a good framework for battling this crisis. However, it has some serious shortcomings – shortcomings that will greatly impact its chances of success. That is why this chamber must ensure that any AIDS legislation it passes will be effective on the ground. In order to do this, we must look carefully at the facts, and at the reality of the situation. This must be our first priority.

Mr. President, there are well over 42 million people currently living with HIV/AIDS. In 2001 alone, there were approximately five million new infections. Even worse is that the number of infections continues to grow at an alarming rate. There are 15,000 new infections every day, and half of these infections – half – are in children between 15 and 24 years of age.

Without a doubt, the region hardest hit by this pandemic is sub-Saharan Africa. Approximately 70 percent of the worldwide total of people with HIV/AIDS live in that part of the world, and well over 29 million people are currently infected. The overall rate of infection among adults in the region is close to nine percent, compared with 1.2 percent worldwide, and in seven countries, the infection rate is over 20 percent.

Experts contend that the severity of the AIDS pandemic in that region is directly related to its wide-spread poverty, lack of education, ill-equipped and underfunded health systems, and local taboos that stigmatize and ostracize those who are infected. Even more devastating to the region is that the AIDS pandemic creates a vicious circle of events that, despite international aid, increasingly hinders the ability of affected societies to help themselves.

This vicious circle is pervasive throughout all sectors of society. Skilled workers, teachers, farmers, management executives, and government officials alike are falling prey to AIDS. In fact, according to UNAIDS, by 2020, the most affected countries will experience a loss of more than 20 percent of their Gross Domestic Product.

AIDS is also having a debilitating effect on our hemisphere. In Guyana, almost three percent of the adult population is infected, and in Haiti, a nation long-suffering from substantial economic and political instability, more than six percent of its adult population are living with the virus. Indeed, throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, over 1.9 million people are infected, and in some Caribbean countries, the rates of prevalence are second only to sub-Saharan Africa.

Throughout the world, AIDS is killing millions of parents, and often leaves young children in the precarious position of having to supply food, money, and medicine for their families. The World Bank estimates that there are currently 15.6 million AIDS orphans, and this number is expected to double by 2010. Many of these children, especially girls, quit school and become victims of sexual violence or commercial sex workers. And, due to lack of resources and education, only a fraction of these children know that they are infected. Most do not even believe that they are at risk or know how AIDS is spread.

I urge my colleagues to carefully examine this situation. Many of these children are not promiscuous because of childish recklessness. Certainly, children do not desire to become commercial sex workers. They are children. Given the chance, they would play games and go to school, as do most children. However, in many cases, their reality, as well as the obligation to provide for their families, forces them into this lifestyle.

I know that citing the successful efforts in the nation of Uganda, some of my colleagues argue that United States AIDS assistance should focus on the promotion of abstinence among children. Certainly, encouraging young, unmarried children to abstain is a worthy goal. We can teach them to abstain, we can urge them to abstain, and we should. However, we can not ignore the multitude of factors with which we are faced. We must remember that the Uganda plan worked because it encouraged abstinence, monogamy, and distributed condoms – the “ABC” model. Most of all, it worked because the President of that nation made it a national priority to educate his people about HIV/AIDS.

In my view, the most important distinction among regions of the world has been the ability of affected nations to deal with the AIDS crisis and to educate their people about it, as well as the ability of infected people to pay for a variety of life-saving or life-prolonging treatments.

I know we can all remember a time in the United States when in schools, television advertisements, and billboards, we strove to educate Americans about HIV/AIDS. In fact, this effort continues, and with much success. Coupled with access to state-of-the-art treatments, Americans with HIV are able to live longer and healthier lives than ever before. But it is important to realize that the methods used to progress in one area of the world will not necessarily be effective in another. In many regions, AIDS infection stems from an intricate social reality – one with many contributing factors. In most of these countries, poverty deprives the people of effective systems of health information, health education, and health care. AIDS counseling is often unavailable, and HIV testing is difficult for many to obtain. Lack of resources to buy and distribute the expensive drugs that prolong life for those infected with HIV, as well as the rarity of sex education and prevention methods, have compounded these problems.
Therefore, we must not ignore the widespread destitution caused by this disease, which forces many people – children and adults – into a lifestyle that dramatically increases their risk of infection. Any effort to fight AIDS must be accompanied by an effort to fight poverty and build infrastructure; it must be focused on helping people to help themselves. It is my hope that as the Senate addresses the issue of foreign aid in the coming year, it pays particular attention to the other myriad needs on the continent of Africa, as well as in other poverty-stricken regions throughout the world.

In addition, we must not ignore existing institutions, such as the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. While I strongly support the provision in this bill authorizing up to $1 billion for the Global Fund in fiscal year 2004, I am concerned that the Bush Administration will instead choose to follow its fiscal year 2004 budget request, and only allocate $200 million for this important institution. Indeed, such a decision would threaten the ability of the Global Fund to continue its important work; it would be a step backwards in our fight against AIDS.

And lastly, although this bill will serve to combat HIV/AIDS in twelve African countries, as well as Haiti and Guyana, it is absolutely essential that we focus our efforts not only on these countries, but on the world at large. HIV/AIDS is a global problem and it needs a global response. My amendment designating Caribbean countries as priority countries for United States support was an attempt to give additional attention where it is most needed.

To highlight the necessity of this global approach, I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues a report on AIDS, which was published in January 2000 by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This report states that by 2010, the focal point of infections will most likely shift from sub-Saharan Africa to Nigeria, Ethiopia, India, Russia, and China. There will be approximately 50 to 75 million infected people in these countries alone, and according to the CIA, the AIDS crisis will contribute to political instability and slow democratic development. These are dire predictions, and we have an obligation to address them.

Mr. President, our intentions are noble and our conviction is real. But in order to achieve all of these vital goals, we must fully and sensibly commit ourselves to the fight against AIDS. That means providing the necessary resources to prevent and treat this illness, sufficiently funding important organizations and vaccine research, educating people about AIDS, providing a truly global response, and ensuring that our efforts are effective and grounded on the realities of those in need. And, as we consider this bill, it is crucial to remember that it is only a first step. In order to succeed, we must also change the reality in which this disease thrives.

If we don’t act with urgency, sensibility, clarity, and deliberation, we will be condemning to death countless men, women, and children throughout the world. We must act now. We can not afford to fail.

I thank the President.