Eliot Engel

I was tasked with briefing President Bush on the importance of deepening our relationship with India.

I managed the U.S.-Indian civil nuclear agreement on the House floor and beat back the anti-India amendments.

I helped build that caucus from just 12 members to 160 members.

The free debate is the cornerstone of democracy.

I share your concern about challenges some NGOs are facing in India.

I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), a very valued member of our Foreign Affairs Committee.

Let me say that I appreciate my friend, Chairman Royce's words. We don't agree totally on this, but we do agree that the Iranian regime is a bad regime and they need to be checked. And I would hope that after this whole process is done…

I have been an advocate for many years of increased production of flex-fuel and alternative fuel vehicles.

Aren't the standards working as proposed, even though my friend Mr. Barton wants to repeal the whole program?

I have no objection to the gentleman's amendment, but I would, again, say that while there may be objections to what the President did, he is not the first President to do it.

That is what this Engel amendment will do. That is why I support it, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

When we work together on this committee, on these issues of critical importance, the country is stronger and the country is safer.

The notion that the United States delivered pallets of cash as ransom for the release of our citizens is simply false.

Let's be clear. It is the policy of this administration that the United States does not pay ransom for its citizens.

I have been extremely vocal about the need to crack down on Iran's dangerous behavior.

That is why the world's top financial body for money laundering warns that moving cash is one of the main methods used to move criminal assets, launder money, and finance terrorism.

I was raising questions about this $1.7 billion payment when it was first made, and, quite frankly, not too many of us were focused on it until it was revealed that it was paid in cash.

The administration has intentionally left us--that is, this committee--they have intentionally left us in the dark.

There was no ransom payment, and this bill is an unfortunate attempt to play, in my opinion, politics with an issue.

Let us also be clear that using leverage when conducting diplomatic negotiations is a common and smart strategy.

This bill is clearly a partisan bill that is not made to unite but to divide.

I think we can. I think we should. I think that 80 to 90 percent of our concerns are identical.

The main thing we want to get, or I would like to get at, is the fact that there was no notice to Congress

My amendment is fairly straightforward and in my view goes to the core problem that has arisen from this Iran payment situation, which is Congress' oversight role.

Our goal would be to do the same thing.